Ohio court takes strong stance favoring arbitration

An employee assented to an arbitration agreement by signing it electronically, the Ohio 10th District Court of Appeals recently held. Further, the court found the employee wouldn’t be prejudiced (or harmed) by having to arbitrate his claims while simultaneously defending against his former employer’s unrelated claims in court.

Facts

Khaleel Mohiuddin was a former employee of a company called Lifestyle, where he held the position of vice president of finance, asset management. Like many other employers, the company used a third-party, cloud-based service for its recruitment and onboarding process. As part of the process, electronic employment documents were sent to candidates who accepted job offers. The documents included tax withholding forms, direct deposit authorization, and an arbitration agreement.

Mohiuddin electronically signed the arbitration agreement and a confidentiality agreement. About three years later, he resigned from the position with Lifestyle and accepted employment with a competitor, allegedly in violation of his noncompetition agreement. He also allegedly sent several files containing confidential information belonging to Lifestyle to his personal e-mail account.

Lifestyle filed a lawsuit against Mohiuddin, seeking equitable relief to prevent the disclosure of its confidential information to his new employer. He filed a counterclaim alleging discrimination and intentional interference with his contract.