Fazio test in Ohio

2023“The Ohio Supreme Court has held that whether a cause of action is within the scope of an arbitration agreement may be determined by applying the federal standard found in Fazio v. Lehman Bros., Inc., 340 F.3d 386 (6th Cir.2003).” Hicks at ¶ 14 and 4 (applying the Fazio standard in the case of an arbitration agreement including a clause that “[a]ny controversy or claim between or among the parties hereto including but not limited to those arising out of or relating to this instrument”); Academy of Medicine at ¶ 15. 7 Case No. 2021-L-122 {¶19} Fazio provides that, to determine “whether an issue

2023“The Ohio Supreme Court has held that whether a cause of action is within the scope of an arbitration agreement may be determined by applying the federal standard found in Fazio v. Lehman Bros., Inc., 340 F.3d 386 (6th Cir.2003).” Hicks at ¶ 14 and 4 (applying the Fazio standard in the case of an arbitration agreement including a clause that “[a]ny controversy or claim between or among the parties hereto including but not limited to those arising out of or relating to this instrument”); Academy of Medicine at ¶ 15. 7 Case No. 2021-L-122 {¶19} Fazio provides that, to determine “whether an issue

2023And despite the concurring opinion’s protestation, it is the lead opinion that “assumes what needs to be established” when it assumes Mr. Christopher was acting within the scope of his employment and, therefore, may enforce the arbitration agreement. 17 Case No. 2021-L-122 {¶43} The majority appropriately begins its analysis of whether Ms. Duff’s claims for relief fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement with the seminal case of Academy of Medicine of Cincinnati v. Aetna Health, Inc., 108 Ohio St.3d 185 , 2006-Ohio- 657, 842 N.E.2d 488 , which incorporated the Fazio test from federal

2023And despite the concurring opinion’s protestation, it is the lead opinion that “assumes what needs to be established” when it assumes Mr. Christopher was acting within the scope of his employment and, therefore, may enforce the arbitration agreement. 17 Case No. 2021-L-122 {¶43} The majority appropriately begins its analysis of whether Ms. Duff’s claims for relief fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement with the seminal case of Academy of Medicine of Cincinnati v. Aetna Health, Inc., 108 Ohio St.3d 185 , 2006-Ohio- 657, 842 N.E.2d 488 , which incorporated the Fazio test from federal

2025Kakiuchi & Co., Ltd., 815 F.2d 840, 846 (2d Cir. 1987); see also Alexander v. Wells Fargo Fin.

2025Kakiuchi & Co., Ltd., 815 F.2d 840, 846 (2d Cir. 1987); see also Alexander v. Wells Fargo Fin.

2015The court further stated that, “Jones’ allegations do not ‘touch matters’ related to her employment, let alone have a ‘significant relationship’ to her employment contract.” Id. at 241 (i.e., the Fazio test). {¶43} The Eleventh Circuit entertained the question of whether a broadly drafted arbitration clause encompassed an employee being drugged and sexually assaulted by her cruise ship coworkers in Doe v. Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd., 657 F.3d 1204 (11th Cir.2011).

2015The court further stated that, “Jones’ allegations do not ‘touch matters’ related to her employment, let alone have a ‘significant relationship’ to her employment contract.” Id. at 241 (i.e., the Fazio test). {¶43} The Eleventh Circuit entertained the question of whether a broadly drafted arbitration clause encompassed an employee being drugged and sexually assaulted by her cruise ship coworkers in Doe v. Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd., 657 F.3d 1204 (11th Cir.2011).

2015Cuyahoga No. 86857, 2006-Ohio-3356, ¶ 15 (“tort claims that may be asserted independently, without reference to the contract, fall outside the scope of the arbitration provision”). {¶31} The Academy of Medicine court elaborated on the propriety of employing the Fazio test in light of the presumption of arbitrability in Ohio: The Fazio test does not act as a detriment to arbitration.

2015Cuyahoga No. 86857, 2006-Ohio-3356, ¶ 15 (“tort claims that may be asserted independently, without reference to the contract, fall outside the scope of the arbitration provision”). {¶31} The Academy of Medicine court elaborated on the propriety of employing the Fazio test in light of the presumption of arbitrability in Ohio: The Fazio test does not act as a detriment to arbitration.

2007Council of Smaller Enterprises at 665. {¶ 12} The Ohio Supreme Court has sanctioned the use of a federal test to determine *Page 5 the arbitrability of a claim: {¶ 13} "We find that the Fazio test 3 is consistent with Ohio law and is not contrary to federal law on the issue of arbitrability. * * * [I]n determining whether a cause of action is within the scope of an arbitration agreement, a state court in Ohio may base that determination on a federal standard that inquires whether the action could be maintained without reference to the contract or relationship at issue." Academy of Medicine of

2007Council of Smaller Enterprises at 665. {¶ 12} The Ohio Supreme Court has sanctioned the use of a federal test to determine *Page 5 the arbitrability of a claim: {¶ 13} "We find that the Fazio test 3 is consistent with Ohio law and is not contrary to federal law on the issue of arbitrability. * * * [I]n determining whether a cause of action is within the scope of an arbitration agreement, a state court in Ohio may base that determination on a federal standard that inquires whether the action could be maintained without reference to the contract or relationship at issue." Academy of Medicine of