This case explores the breadth of Georgia’s Long Arm Statute. Appellant Hyperdynamics Corporation filed the instant lawsuit against various resident and nonresident corporate defendants, alleging that they had fraudulently induced Hyperdynamics to engage in a predatory financing scheme causing it injury. The trial court dismissed the action as to the nonresident defendants after concluding that they fell outside of the reach of the trial court’s personal jurisdiction. Hyperdynamics appeals, arguing that the trial court misconstrued Georgia’s Long Arm Statute. Because we conclude that jurisdiction in Georgia is proper over the nonresidents under the theory of conspiracy jurisdiction, we reverse. I. Burden of Proof and Standard of Review A defendant moving to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction bears the burden of proving the absence of jurisdiction. To meet that burden, the defendant may raise matters not contained in the pleadings. However, when the outcome of the motion depends on unstipulated facts, it must be accompanied by supporting affidavits or citations to evidentiary material in the record. Further, to the extent that defendant’s evidence controverts the allegations of the complaint, plaintiff may not rely on mere allegations, but must also submit supporting affidavits or documentary evidence. Citation omitted. Yukon Partners v. Lodge Keeper Group , 258 Ga. App. 1, 2 572 SE2d 647 2002. When examining and deciding jurisdictional issues on a motion to dismiss, a trial court “has discretion to hear oral testimony or to decide the motion on the basis of affidavits and documentary evidence alone pursuant to OCGA § 9-11-43 b.” Citation and punctuation omitted. Scovill Fasteners v. Sure-Snap Corp. , 207 Ga. App. 539, 539-540 428 SE2d 435 1993. See Alcatraz Media v. Yahoo Inc. , 290 Ga. App. 882, 884 1 660 SE2d 797 2008. If the trial court conducts an evidentiary hearing, it may resolve disputed factual issues, and we will show deference to those findings. See Alcatraz Media, 290 Ga. App at 886 2; McLendon v. Albany Warehouse Co. , 203 Ga. App. 865, 866 1 418 SE2d 130 1992. On the other hand, where, as here, a motion is resolved based solely upon written submissions,1 “the reviewing court is in an equal position with the trial court to determine the facts and therefore examines the facts under a non-deferential standard,” Scovill Fasteners , 207 Ga. App. at 540, and we resolve all disputed issues of fact in favor of the party asserting the existence of personal jurisdiction. Alcatraz Media, 290 Ga. App. at 884 1.
II. The Parties
