absence of an evidentiary hearing in Ohio

2024“In the absence of an evidentiary hearing on a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, ‘the court must view the allegations in the pleadings and the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and make all reasonable inferences in the plaintiff’s favor.’” Id., quoting Simmons v. Budde, 2015-Ohio-3780, ¶ 7 (10th Dist.).

2024“If a plaintiff produces sufficient evidence to allow reasonable minds to conclude the trial court has personal jurisdiction over a defendant, ‘then the trial court could not dismiss the complaint without holding an evidentiary hearing.’” Id., quoting Benjamin v. KPMG Barbados, 2005-Ohio-1959, ¶ 27 (10th Dist.). {¶92} “To determine whether Ohio has personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant, a court must engage in a two-step analysis.” (Citations omitted.) Id. at ¶ 13.

2021Accord Goldstein v. Christiansen, 70 Ohio St.3d 232, 236 , 638 N.E.2d 541, 544 (1994) (Court was required to view allegations in the pleadings and the documentary evidence in a light most favorable to the plaintiffs, resolving all reasonable competing inferences in their favor.) ANALYSIS {¶19} Ceculski contends, in her sole assignment of error, that the trial court erred by dismissing the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction.

2021Accord Goldstein v. Christiansen, 70 Ohio St.3d 232, 236 , 638 N.E.2d 541, 544 (1994) (Court was required to view allegations in the pleadings and the documentary evidence in a light most favorable to the plaintiffs, resolving all reasonable competing inferences in their favor.) ANALYSIS {¶19} Ceculski contends, in her sole assignment of error, that the trial court erred by dismissing the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction.

2026See Dunn at ¶ 24 (“neither party submitted evidence to the trial court and we will not resolve factual disputes without any evidence in the record.”). {¶39} Because Gray did not dispute that the cost to repair L.J.’s car was $1,685.63, the trial court had no obligation to hold a restitution hearing.

2024“If a plaintiff produces sufficient evidence to allow reasonable minds to conclude the trial court has personal jurisdiction over a defendant, ‘then the trial court could not dismiss the complaint without holding an evidentiary hearing.’” Id., quoting Benjamin v. KPMG Barbados, 2005-Ohio-1959, ¶ 27 (10th Dist.). {¶92} “To determine whether Ohio has personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant, a court must engage in a two-step analysis.” (Citations omitted.) Id. at ¶ 13.

2022No. 03AP-807, 2004-Ohio-3227, ¶ 15 ("[W]ithout an evidentiary hearing the trial court cannot assess the credibility of the defendant or the persuasiveness of the defendant's evidence, and thus the court would be hindered, in the absence of an evidentiary hearing, from determining whether the defendant was truthful in claiming not to have received service.").

2014Instead, it found that courts had interpreted Dean to confirm the general rule that “the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard never applies in the absence of an evidentiary hearing.” Schneider at 698, fn. 6 , citing Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Still N the Water Publishing, 327 F.3d 472 (6th Cir.2003).

2014See, e.g., Fraley, 138 Ohio St.3d 250 , 2014-Ohio-452 , 6 N.E.3d 9, at ¶ 11 ; Kauffman, 126 Ohio St.3d 81 , 2010-Ohio- 2251, 930 N.E.2d 784, at ¶ 27 ; Goldstein v. Christiansen, 70 Ohio St.3d 232, 236 , 638 N.E.2d 541 (1994).

2014See, e.g., Fraley, 138 Ohio St.3d 250 , 2014-Ohio-452 , 6 N.E.3d 9, at ¶ 11 ; Kauffman, 126 Ohio St.3d 81 , 2010-Ohio- 2251, 930 N.E.2d 784, at ¶ 27 ; Goldstein v. Christiansen, 70 Ohio St.3d 232, 236 , 638 N.E.2d 541 (1994).