Background
Gary Walker sued Jasmine Arrington and The Trash Boys LLC, alleging defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, business disparagement, tortious interference, and seeking injunctive relief. The dispute involved competing businesses and was based partly, though not entirely, on social-media posts attributed to the defendants.
The defendants moved for expedited relief under Ohio’s Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA). The trial court initially scheduled a May 6, 2026 hearing, but canceled it the day before without a signed entry or a substitute procedure. The following day, it granted the motion and dismissed all claims with prejudice.
The Court’s Holding
The Eighth District reversed and remanded because R.C. 2747.04(A)(1) required the trial court to conduct a hearing on the UPEPA motion. Canceling the scheduled hearing without converting it into a nonoral hearing or otherwise providing a substitute hearing procedure meant no statutorily required hearing occurred.
The court held that the statute does not necessarily require an oral hearing. A trial court may use a nonoral hearing, but it must give reasonable notice of that procedure and set a date certain for it. On remand, the trial court may rely on properly submitted evidence already in the record and need not reopen briefing or allow new evidentiary submissions. The court found Walker’s challenge to the implicit denial of leave to amend moot in light of the reversal.
Key Takeaways
- A UPEPA motion cannot be granted without the hearing required by R.C. 2747.04(A)(1).
- A nonoral hearing may satisfy the statute, but the court must clearly notify the parties and establish a definite hearing date.
- A party does not waive a hearing by failing to request one when the court already scheduled it and then canceled it immediately before ruling.
Why It Matters
The decision clarifies that Ohio trial courts must provide an actual hearing event before resolving a UPEPA expedited-relief motion. Although the procedure may be paper-based, a court cannot simply cancel a scheduled hearing and rule the next day without clearly replacing it with a noticed nonoral process.