l. FACTS: Eight limited partners led a lawsuit in the Lucas County Court of Common pleas, alleging that the general partners in if] different limited partnerships had engaged in an extensive pattern of selfdealing iat had involved converting partnership property for their own personal use. i'tlso named in the lawsuit was the accounting firm of Donald J. Goldstein, CPA, a resident of Florida, and Goldstein, Lewis, and Company, a professional corporation located in Florida. The plaintiffs claimed that the accountant and the accounting rm had lcnovm of the general partners' misconduct and were therefore liable to the plaintiff for that malpractice. The accountant and the accounting firm decided to end the suit as quickly as possible. Consequently, they led a motion for dismissal. The motion stated that the courts of Ohio lacked personal jurisdiction over them because they were from Florida. They further stated that they did not solicit business in Ohio, maintained no places of business in Ohio, and had no license to act as accountant in Ohio, owned no property in Ohio, provided all services from Florida, and led no documents wii the state of Ohio. Thus, they concluded that they fell outside the power of Ohio's longarm statute. Conversely, the plaintiffs argued that the defendants transacted business in the state of Ohio on a continuing and ongoing basis but regularly submitting nancial statements to the limited partners in Ohio and by being actively involved in the decisions of the general partnership. Did the activities of the accountant and the accounting firm place them under the jurisdiction of the Ohio court, according to the state \"longarm\" statute? Explain