Kelsey v. Carrington Homes, Inc., 2017 Ohio 4111

Kelseys contracted with Carrington to build a home addition under a written Home Construction Agreement containing a broad arbitration clause covering disputes “under this Agreement or under any document regarding the construction.”
After alleging construction defects, the Kelseys terminated the Agreement and sued for breach of contract, violations of the Home Construction Service Supplier’s Act, negligence, fraud, and sought declaratory relief about the arbitration provision.
Carrington moved to stay proceedings and compel arbitration under R.C. Chapter 2711; the trial court granted the motion without holding a hearing.
The Kelseys timely appealed, raising five assignments of error focused on procedural and substantive challenges to the arbitration order and clause.
The appellate court reversed solely because the trial court failed to conduct the hearing required for a motion to compel arbitration and remanded for that hearing; the court did not reach the parties’ other arguments as they were rendered moot by the reversal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court erred by failing to hold a hearing on motion to compel arbitration	Kelsey: R.C. 2711.03 requires a hearing before compelling arbitration	Carrington: no hearing required to stay/compel; motion properly decided on papers	Court: Reversed — R.C. 2711.03 requires a hearing on a motion to compel arbitration; remand for hearing
Whether court must determine validity of arbitration clause under R.C. 2711.03(B) before compelling arbitration	Kelsey: trial court must decide clause validity before compelling arbitration	Carrington: arbitration clause governs, so arbitration should be ordered	Court: Not addressed (moot on remand)
Whether a jury must be impaneled under R.C. 2711.03(B) to decide validity	Kelsey: statutory right to jury for clause validity	Carrington: no jury required here	Court: Not addressed (moot on remand)
Whether referenced arbitration rules/procedures exist (affecting clause enforceability)	Kelsey: clause refers to non-existent rules, invalidating it	Carrington: rules exist or clause enforceable regardless	Court: Not addressed (moot on remand)
Whether arbitration clause is procedurally/substantively unconscionable	Kelsey: clause is unconscionable and unenforceable	Carrington: clause is conscionable and enforceable	Court: Not addressed (moot on remand)

Maestle v. Best Buy Co., 100 Ohio St.3d 330 (Ohio 2003) (interpreting R.C. 2711 stay/compel procedures and noting hearing requirements for motions to compel arbitration)