The Ohio Court of Appeals recently affirmed a lower court's ruling that requires arbitration in a case involving The RoviSys Company and MRS Instrumentation & Controls, L.L.C. This decision impacts how companies handle employment disputes and arbitration agreements, particularly when one party is a former employee.

The case, RoviSys Co. v. MRS Instrumentation & Controls, L.L.C., was filed under docket number 2026-P-0051. The court's ruling on November 2, 2026, upheld the Portage County Court of Common Pleas' decision to grant a stay pending arbitration, affecting RoviSys and its former employee, Christopher Manners, along with MRS, Manners' new employer.

Background

The RoviSys Company is an Ohio corporation that specializes in automation and information services. Christopher Manners was employed by RoviSys as an engineer until he left to work for MRS Instrumentation & Controls, a company founded in November 2024. RoviSys filed a lawsuit against Manners and MRS in October 2025, claiming that Manners unlawfully diverted trade secrets and confidential information to benefit MRS while still employed by RoviSys.

RoviSys' complaint included twelve claims against Manners and MRS, alleging breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, and other torts. The company sought various remedies, including a temporary restraining order and damages. Shortly after filing the complaint, RoviSys also sought a preliminary injunction, which was granted in November 2025.

The Ruling

The Ohio Court of Appeals, led by Judge John J. Eklund, ruled that the trial court acted correctly in granting a stay pending arbitration. The court found that RoviSys' claims fell within the scope of the arbitration agreement that Manners had signed when he was employed. The court stated, "the trial court did not abuse its discretion in referring the matter to arbitration."

The court also addressed RoviSys' arguments that MRS, as a nonsignatory to the arbitration agreement, could not invoke the clause. The court concluded that the trial court correctly applied the law by staying RoviSys' claims against MRS, noting that even claims involving nonsignatories can be stayed if they relate to a written arbitration agreement.

Impact

This ruling reinforces the enforceability of arbitration agreements in employment contracts, particularly regarding disputes involving former employees and their new employers. It highlights the importance of clear arbitration clauses and the understanding that such agreements can apply to claims involving nonsignatories under certain circumstances.

Going forward, this decision may encourage companies to include comprehensive arbitration clauses in their employment agreements to protect their interests in potential disputes. It also underscores the need for employees to understand the implications of arbitration agreements they sign, especially concerning their rights in disputes that may arise after leaving a company.

What's Next

As of now, there are no indications that RoviSys plans to appeal the ruling. The case will proceed to arbitration as mandated by the court. Details regarding any related cases were not available in the court filing.