To be valid and enforceable any arbitration agreements pursuant to sections 2711.01 and 2711.22 of the Revised Code for controversies involving a medical, dental, chiropractic, or optometric claim that is entered into prior to a patient receiving any care, diagnosis, or treatment shall include or be subject to the following conditions:
(A) The agreement shall provide that the care, diagnosis, or treatment will be provided whether or not the patient signs the agreement to arbitrate;
(B) The agreement shall provide that the patient, or the patient's spouse, or the personal representative of the patient's estate in the event of the patient's death or incapacity, shall have a right to withdraw the patient's consent to arbitrate the patient's claim by notifying the healthcare provider or hospital in writing within thirty days after the patient's signing of the agreement. Nothing in this division shall be construed to mean that the spouse of a competent patient can withdraw over the objection of the patient the consent of the patient to arbitrate;
(C) The agreement shall provide that the decision whether or not to sign the agreement is solely a matter for the patient's determination without any influence;
(D) The agreement shall, if appropriate, provide that its terms constitute a waiver of any right to a trial in court, or a waiver of any right to a trial by jury;
(E) The agreement shall provide that the arbitration expenses shall be divided equally between the parties to the agreement;
(F) Any arbitration panel shall consist of three persons, no more than one of whom shall be a physician or the representative of a hospital;
(G) The arbitration agreement shall be separate from any other agreement, consent, or document;
(H) The agreement shall not be submitted to a patient for approval when the patient's condition prevents the patient from making a rational decision whether or not to agree;
(I) Filing of a medical, dental, chiropractic, or optometric claim within the thirty days provided for withdrawal of a patient from the arbitration agreement shall be deemed a withdrawal from the agreement;
(J) The agreement shall contain a separately stated notice that clearly informs the patient of the patient's rights under division (B) of this section.
Zellner v. Prestige Gardens Rehab. & Nursing Ctr., 2019-Ohio-595. · cites it 15דFirst, Zellner argues that the trial court erred by staying the action because the arbitration agreement is void, invalid, and unenforceable as it is procedurally and substantively unconscionable and because it fails to comply with R.C. 2711.23. In addition, Zellner argues that…”
Donnell v. Parkcliffe Alzheimer's Cmty., 2017-Ohio-7982. · cites it 5דVoid under R.C. 2711.23 {¶ 26} In his fourth assignment of error, appellant argues that the arbitration agreement is void because it fails to satisfy any of the conditions of R.”
Roberts v. KND Dev. 51, L.L.C., 2020-Ohio-4986. · cites it 11דVoid Under Ohio Law Roberts next contends that the Agreement was void pursuant to R.C. 2711.23. R.C. 2711.23 governs arbitration agreements provisions required for “controversies involving a medical, dental, chiropractic, or optometric claim that is entered into prior to a…”
Pearson v. Manorcare Health Servs., 2015-Ohio-5460, 56 N.E.3d 306. · cites it 6ד{¶44} R.C. 2711.23 outlines certain terms to which an arbitration agreement is subject for purposes of determining its validity and enforceability.”
Martin v. ManorCare Health Servs., L.L.C., 2024-Ohio-2250, 246 N.E.3d 598. · cites it 4דR.C. 2711.23 states, in relevant part: To be valid and enforceable any arbitration agreements pursuant to sections 2711.”
In re Est. of Ryan v. Brookdale Zanesville, 2026-Ohio-411. · cites it 22דTherein, Brookdale argued the Estate’s claims were covered by the Agreement to Arbitrate set forth in Section V of the Residency Agreement (“the Arbitration Provision”) and said provision complied with R.C. 2711.23; therefore, was enforceable.”
Davidson v. Bucklew, 629 N.E.2d 456 (Ohio Ct. App. 11th Dist. 1992). “Countless times injunctive relief has issued in order to avoid the needless accumulation of damages by either maintaining the status quo during the pendency of an action, or enforcing the court’s determination thereafter.”
Murman v. WP Operating, 2026-Ohio-2080. · cites it 44דRichard (“Richard’s Estate”), opposed the motion, arguing below that the arbitration agreement at issue was unenforceable because it was not signed by the parties, did not satisfy the legal requirements of R.C. 2711.23, and was unconscionable. The trial court agreed with…”
Scharf v. Manor Care of Willoughby, OH, L.L.C., 2020-Ohio-1322. · cites it 6ד22 and R.C. 2711.23 prevent nursing homes from entering into retroactive arbitration agreements after care has been rendered.”
Morgan v. Cmty. Health Partners, 2013-Ohio-2259. “22(B)(1) (defining a “healthcare provider” as used in R.C. 2711.23 and 2711.24 as including several licensed healthcare professionals, such as a physician, licensed practical nurse, registered nurse, advanced practice registered nurse, and emergency medical technicians), and R.”
Loomis v. O'Neill Healthcare - Middleburg Hts., 2026-Ohio-2079. · cites it 8דSubstantive Unconscionability With respect to substantive unconscionability, the trial court found that the agreement did not abide by the requirements of R.C. 2711.23. Additionally, the court concluded that appellants, as the drafting party, used the word “desire,” which did…”
Reissland v. Sage Park Alzheimer's Special Care Ctr., 2025-Ohio-5153. · cites it 3ד1 I note that appellee also argues for the first time on appeal that the arbitration provision in the residency agreement is unenforceable because it does not comply with the requirements of R.C. 2711.23. The majority did not address this argument and neither do I.”
Roberts v. KND Dev. 51, L.L.C., 2020-Ohio-4986. “Void Under Ohio Law Roberts next contends that the Agreement was void pursuant to R.C. 2711.23. R.C. 2711.23 governs arbitration agreements provisions required for “controversies involving a medical, dental, chiropractic, or optometric claim that is entered into prior to a…”
In re Est. of Ryan v. Brookdale Zanesville, 2026-Ohio-411. “Therein, Brookdale argued the Estate’s claims were covered by the Agreement to Arbitrate set forth in Section V of the Residency Agreement (“the Arbitration Provision”) and said provision complied with R.C. 2711.23; therefore, was enforceable.”
Thomas v. Vitale, 8 Ohio App. Unrep. 317 (Ohio Ct. App. 7th Dist. 1990).
Ohio Rev. Code § 2711.23(B): 1 case
In re Est. of Ryan v. Brookdale Zanesville, 2026-Ohio-411. “Therein, Brookdale argued the Estate’s claims were covered by the Agreement to Arbitrate set forth in Section V of the Residency Agreement (“the Arbitration Provision”) and said provision complied with R.C. 2711.23; therefore, was enforceable.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2711.23(C): 4 cases
Zellner v. Prestige Gardens Rehab. & Nursing Ctr., 2019-Ohio-595. “First, Zellner argues that the trial court erred by staying the action because the arbitration agreement is void, invalid, and unenforceable as it is procedurally and substantively unconscionable and because it fails to comply with R.C. 2711.23. In addition, Zellner argues that…”
Martin v. ManorCare Health Servs., L.L.C., 2024-Ohio-2250, 246 N.E.3d 598. “R.C. 2711.23 states, in relevant part: To be valid and enforceable any arbitration agreements pursuant to sections 2711.”
Scharf v. Manor Care of Willoughby, OH, L.L.C., 2020-Ohio-1322. “22 and R.C. 2711.23 prevent nursing homes from entering into retroactive arbitration agreements after care has been rendered.”
In re Est. of Ryan v. Brookdale Zanesville, 2026-Ohio-411. “Therein, Brookdale argued the Estate’s claims were covered by the Agreement to Arbitrate set forth in Section V of the Residency Agreement (“the Arbitration Provision”) and said provision complied with R.C. 2711.23; therefore, was enforceable.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2711.23(F): 2 cases
Roberts v. KND Dev. 51, L.L.C., 2020-Ohio-4986. “Void Under Ohio Law Roberts next contends that the Agreement was void pursuant to R.C. 2711.23. R.C. 2711.23 governs arbitration agreements provisions required for “controversies involving a medical, dental, chiropractic, or optometric claim that is entered into prior to a…”
In re Est. of Ryan v. Brookdale Zanesville, 2026-Ohio-411. “Therein, Brookdale argued the Estate’s claims were covered by the Agreement to Arbitrate set forth in Section V of the Residency Agreement (“the Arbitration Provision”) and said provision complied with R.C. 2711.23; therefore, was enforceable.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2711.23(G): 3 cases
Roberts v. KND Dev. 51, L.L.C., 2020-Ohio-4986. “Void Under Ohio Law Roberts next contends that the Agreement was void pursuant to R.C. 2711.23. R.C. 2711.23 governs arbitration agreements provisions required for “controversies involving a medical, dental, chiropractic, or optometric claim that is entered into prior to a…”
In re Est. of Ryan v. Brookdale Zanesville, 2026-Ohio-411. “Therein, Brookdale argued the Estate’s claims were covered by the Agreement to Arbitrate set forth in Section V of the Residency Agreement (“the Arbitration Provision”) and said provision complied with R.C. 2711.23; therefore, was enforceable.”
Murman v. WP Operating, 2026-Ohio-2080. “Richard (“Richard’s Estate”), opposed the motion, arguing below that the arbitration agreement at issue was unenforceable because it was not signed by the parties, did not satisfy the legal requirements of R.C. 2711.23, and was unconscionable. The trial court agreed with…”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2711.23(H): 2 cases
Pearson v. Manorcare Health Servs., 2015-Ohio-5460, 56 N.E.3d 306. “{¶44} R.C. 2711.23 outlines certain terms to which an arbitration agreement is subject for purposes of determining its validity and enforceability.”
Loomis v. O'Neill Healthcare - Middleburg Hts., 2026-Ohio-2079. “Substantive Unconscionability With respect to substantive unconscionability, the trial court found that the agreement did not abide by the requirements of R.C. 2711.23. Additionally, the court concluded that appellants, as the drafting party, used the word “desire,” which did…”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2711.23(I): 1 case
In re Est. of Ryan v. Brookdale Zanesville, 2026-Ohio-411. “Therein, Brookdale argued the Estate’s claims were covered by the Agreement to Arbitrate set forth in Section V of the Residency Agreement (“the Arbitration Provision”) and said provision complied with R.C. 2711.23; therefore, was enforceable.”
Ohio Rev. Code § 2711.23(J): 1 case
In re Est. of Ryan v. Brookdale Zanesville, 2026-Ohio-411. “Therein, Brookdale argued the Estate’s claims were covered by the Agreement to Arbitrate set forth in Section V of the Residency Agreement (“the Arbitration Provision”) and said provision complied with R.C. 2711.23; therefore, was enforceable.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.