Lofty Holding 656 E. 126th St., L.L.C. v. 656 E. 126th, Ltd.

Summary

The Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed a default judgment against Armand DiNardo in favor of Lofty Holding 656 East 126th ST LLC. The court held that service by ordinary mail was properly completed under Ohio Civ.R. 4.6(D), that DiNardo failed to rebut the presumption of proper service, and that the trial court had personal jurisdiction. The court also concluded that the trial court properly denied DiNardo’s motion to vacate the judgment and dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Holdings

1. Service by ordinary mail was properly perfected because certified-mail service was returned unclaimed, the clerk entered the ordinary-mail service and answer date on the docket, the summons was sent to an address where there was a reasonable expectation of delivery to DiNardo, and the mailing was not returned undelivered.
2. DiNardo failed to rebut the presumption of proper service because he did not present sufficient evidentiary-quality information demonstrating that service was not accomplished and failed to appear at the hearing set to address service.
3. The trial court had personal jurisdiction over DiNardo and properly denied his motion to vacate and dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction; the default judgment was therefore valid.

Questions Presented

1. Whether service by ordinary mail under Ohio Civil Rule 4.6(D) was perfected when certified-mail service was returned unclaimed, the clerk entered the ordinary-mail service and answer date on the docket, and the mailing was not returned as undelivered.
2. Whether DiNardo presented sufficient evidentiary-quality information to rebut the presumption of proper service and thereby establish that the trial court lacked personal jurisdiction.
3. Whether the trial court properly denied DiNardo's motion to vacate the default judgment and dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Disposition

affirmed