Your arbitration agreement may not be as airtight as you think
Employers who rely on arbitration clauses to keep harassment cases out of court just got a serious wake-up call from Ohio.
On February 26, 2026, an Ohio appellate court handed down what appears to be the state's first ruling on a federal law that has been quietly reshaping how sexual harassment disputes are handled in the workplace. The decision carries implications that reach far beyond the parties involved – and squarely into the HR offices of employers across the country.
The case begins with an unusual set of facts. Keith Hansbrough, a male attorney and shareholder at law firm Marshall Dennehey, alleged in his complaint that he had been sexually harassed, discriminated against, and ultimately forced out of his job. His complaint named Leslie M. Jenny, the firm's female managing attorney in Cleveland, as a key alleged harasser – alongside earlier allegations involving a male colleague at the firm, Andrew Wargo, whose alleged conduct dated back to 2018. Hansbrough alleged the conduct and its aftermath continued through his departure in July 2023.
The allegations against Jenny are striking. According to Hansbrough's complaint, she allegedly told him that "me-too does not apply to men" and, when he raised prior harassment complaints, that "people who can't let things go and keep talking about them usually enjoyed them." He further alleged she repeatedly taunted him with references to Wargo, including remarks like "Andy says hello" and "do you miss Andy working here?"
Marshall Dennehey's response was straightforward: the firm pointed to arbitration agreements Hansbrough had signed as part of his shareholder and employment contracts, and moved to have the case sent to private arbitration rather than heard in open court. Both sides agreed the agreements were valid. Under normal circumstances, that would have resolved the matter.
But the court found that a federal law passed in 2022 changed the calculus entirely.
That law, the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act, gives employees the right to take sexual harassment cases to court even when they have previously signed away that right through an arbitration agreement. It was designed, in Congress's stated legislative purpose, to restore access to justice for workers locked out of the court system by the terms of their employment contracts.
The court found that some of Hansbrough's allegations described conduct that occurred after the law took effect. That was enough. Ohio's notice-pleading standard – which requires only that a complaint set out a recognizable claim, not that it prove one – meant the court accepted those allegations at face value for purposes of deciding the arbitration question.
What the court decided next is what employers and HR teams need to pay attention to. The ruling held that once the law applies, it voids the arbitration agreement not just for the harassment claim, but for the entire case. Every count – retaliation, gender discrimination, post-employment retaliation, aiding and abetting – all of it moves to court. The harassment allegation, in effect, becomes the key that unlocks the courthouse door for every related claim.
The appellate court noted it could find no prior Ohio state court decision applying this federal law, making the ruling a first of its kind in the state.
For HR professionals, the practical message is straightforward. Arbitration clauses in employment agreements have long been treated as a reliable way to manage litigation risk. They keep disputes private, limit costs, and reduce unpredictability. This ruling does not eliminate them, but it does place a significant condition on them: if a workplace harassment allegation arises after March 3, 2022, an employee can choose to bypass arbitration entirely – and take everything to court with them.
The case now heads back to the trial court for proceedings on the merits. Hansbrough's allegations remain exactly that – allegations – and nothing has been proven or adjudicated on the facts. But the legal framework the appellate court established on February 26, 2026 is now on the books in Ohio, and its reach is anything but narrow.
For any organization still treating its arbitration agreements as a near-complete shield against employment litigation, this case is a timely prompt to revisit that assumption with legal counsel.
