Everhart v. Merrick Mfg. II, L.L.C.

Citations

• 204 N.E.3d 620
• 2022 Ohio 4626

Syllabus

The trial court erred in dismissing appellant's complaint under Civ.R. 12(B)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court's decision was based on the statute of repose in R.C. 2305.10(C), which bars product liability claims that are not filed within the time specified in the statute. However, this statute does not involve subject matter jurisdiction, which pertains to the court's power to entertain and adjudicate a particular class of cases. Instead, application of the repose statute involves the rights of the parties in a particular case. Furthermore, R.C. 2305.10(C) does not explicitly remove the common pleas court's jurisdiction to hear cases. Instead of focusing on subject matter jurisdiction, the trial court should have considered whether the complaint failed to state a claim. Alternatively, if the court were going to consider evidence outside the complaint (as it did here), it should have allowed appellant to conduct discovery. Failure to do so was an abuse of discretion. Judgment reversed and remanded.