ÿWPCî  ;ˆ•ú»Õ˜ ÕZH×ö®‰çƒÝDù†¶ÁÇ-å„ÉIЮ,³©È²#“Ÿy ÎÌ<„;•¯“ežüëñ’Z#ê]¸Çq ¿ªÅf±Ç+‡u®«i­«lc"„fPúÒá¢k’º Jµ¤6–pþâHQ`‰Tuç„…–ùÖÉõKÍôŠ(è0žS î*>E]¾"ásÆ:ÖñqÛhFÔš»$Ž|CmPx V’Á%_{§ê PdðNe™,;j@kF‡EägzF×mAÌEA´/†åŽ–nE¶ÎêÍR«ËÞ|ç|¡ú/ù¸÷µ#^ ¿ƒ‰A>¨¦]@Œsqls)&©uߧ3˜£'!q/!èÜÛ“7Bdµ¾CÛ÷"å¾rcÄzÔÁ†ÎÌUɈebj)ÄîÆsÞô “"òøRÔ® Œ¾?f¹ªiÚ&àÀ”wÿ+âbJËÛC¤o£ºQPM½]y¤lßz›- äÏm¯ðŒ”¤²¶ö9B å|·u¢%-ËÖydhìWŠÒQÈ­“u—­ë®†ŸXS—ÐCª”­lýlä€|~ »·Æ…õìK±’Ïs.ÛbÎ_+ÏŸ ¡6Ç´éw’­§!b ßï)# >UNI %— 0³U<Pw@Œ4ÌàïU<÷Á3 0÷ô AQë 0D< € U:† † † † † † † † † † † † † † † BÀ ÆÝ 0D£ 0Dç 0D+ + D/o o Bž D3» ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6HPBXLBÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0nLlÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(‹7ÿ$¡¡Ò°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÑ7€ü†XXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€Xd|XXXÔ-šBu Z‹$Arrus BT Roman &'E()U*U+î,Ó€-Ó€.Ó€8n~<$TS Ôˆ 3|x8)LÀÄ  Z $Arrus BT Roman ·Ý ƒ íf$ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÔ€X44XXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIt€was€disputed€whether€Scherer€contacted€Ag€Services€first€or€òòvice„versaóó.€Ð ° ÐHowever,€Scherer€by€affidavit€stated€that€Ag€Services€initially€contacted€him.€€RogerÏHanes,€president€of€Ag€Services,€testified€at€trial€that€he€was€unsure€whether€heÏcontacted€Scherer€first€or€not.(§(3íf$¤¤Ý ƒ7ÿ!ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÑ7€“‘XXdædæ7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€XTSXXXÔÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó !"%Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó üÝ ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X¥AXXXÔÔ€ëˆXX¥AÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X¥AXëˆÔÐ  ÐÌSeptember€3,€1999ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,–ûyAZ‹"Arial Regular dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ7ÿ!ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÓ  ÓÑ7€óÐXXdæXXdæ7ÑÑ  ÑÔ€X44XXXÔÝ  ÝÑTR[¤ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€óÐXXdæXXdæ7Ññ8ññ.ñßr€ (<,(j 8` `€€@Eô±` ttx0,°ð árßñ.ññ8ññ8ñßt€ (>.*jx¢ÿ` `€€@E°` ttx0¹°W àtßñ8ñà@Ì Ì ®àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌà@éé!®àWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSONˆÌà ` àà ¸ à€€€€______________________________________________ÌÌò òUNITED€AGRICULTURAL€SERVICES,€Ð ° ÐINC.,€ó óÐ ²  ÐÌà ` àPlaintiff„Appellee,Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àShelby€Chancery€No.€110127„3ÌVs.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àC.A.€No.€02A01„9812„CH„00353Ð ´   ÐÌò òJOHN€W.€SCHERER,€JR.,€ó óÐ ´  ÐÌà ` àDefendant„Apellant.Ì____________________________________________________________________________ÌÌà@¶ ¶ ®àFROM€THE€SHELBY€COUNTY€CHANCERY€COURTˆÌà@I I ®àTHE€HONORABLE€D.€J.€€ALISSANDRATOS,€CHANCELLORˆÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ÔÔ"®àLenard€Hackel€of€MemphisˆÌà@rr(®àFor€AppelleeˆÌÌà@ ®àRichard€F.€Vaughn€of€MemphisˆÌà@>>(®àFor€AppellantˆÌÌÌà@««$®àò òòòAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDEDó óóóˆÐ ¶$  ÐÌà@'®àOpinion€filed:€ˆÌÌñ)ñÌÌÌñ)ñÌÌÌÌÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àò òW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,Ð ¶1-- Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€Wñ&ñ.S.ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€JUDGEÌÌHñ&ññ'ññ&ñIñ&ññ'ññ(ñOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€JUDGEñ(ñó óñ*ñÐ Æ955 ÐÌÐ È;77' Ðñ*ññ+ññ+ññ,ñÓÓñ,ññ+ñ›à ` àThis€appeal€involves€jurisdiction€under€the€long„arm€statute.€ÏDefendant/appellant,€John€W.€Scherer,€Jr.€(Scherer),€appeals€the€order€of€the€trialÏcourt€awarding€plaintiff/appellee,€United€Agricultural€Services,€Inc.€(Ag€Services),Ïdamages€for€breach€of€contract.Ìà ` àAg€Services€is€a€Tennessee€corporation€based€in€Memphis€that€performsÏenvironmental€site€assessments€and€related€activities.€€Scherer,€a€resident€ofÏMichigan,€is€the€president€of€Michigan€Apple€Corporation,€Inc.€(Michigan€Apple),Ïa€foreign€corporation€doing€business€in€Michigan.Ìà ` àIn€1994,€Michigan€Apple€attempted€to€obtain€a€loan€from€American€FarmÏMortgage€Company€for€the€purpose€of€buying€property€in€Michigan.€€American€FarmÏMortgage€in€turn€wanted€to€sell€Michigan€Appleððs€note€to€Prudential.€€PrudentialÏrequired€a€Phase€I€environmental€site€assessment€on€the€property€prior€to€goingÏthrough€with€the€deal.€€Ag€Services€was€one€of€several€companies€that€the€involvedÏmortgage€companies€used€for€environmental€inspection€purposes.€€A€member€ofÏPrudentialððs€mortgage€department€in€Chicago€contacted€Ag€Services€in€regard€toÏperforming€a€site€inspection€on€the€land€Michigan€Apple€wished€to€purchase.Ìà ` àAg€Services€then€contacted€American€Farm€Mortgage€in€Kentucky€and€wasÏadvised€that€environmental€services€were€needed€by€Michigan€Apple€in€order€toÏobtain€a€loan,€and€that€Ag€Services€should€contact€Michigan€Apple.€€The€presidentÏof€Ag€Services,€Roger€Hanes€(Hanes),€then€contacted€Scherer€in€Michigan€byÏtelephone.׃ ×Ý ƒ##ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Arrangements€were€made€and€employees€from€Ag€Services€traveled€toÐ °,(( ÐMichigan€to€inspect€the€property€on€three€separate€occasions.€€On€each€occasion,€theÏAg€Services€employees€returned€to€Memphis€where€they€did€the€analysis,Ïcompilation,€interpretation,€and€preparation€of€a€report€for€use€by€Michigan€AppleÏin€obtaining€its€loan.€€The€report€on€the€property€was€completed€in€September€1994Ð °400 Ðand€specified€that€clean€up€of€the€property€was€required.€€Ag€Services€again€traveledÏto€Michigan€and€performed€the€clean„up€operation,€completing€it€in€the€spring€ofÏ1995.Ìà ` àAfter€clean„up,€Ag€Services€presented€a€final€report,€the€loan€from€AmericanÏFarm€Mortgages€came€through,€and€Michigan€Apple€purchased€the€property.€€At€theÏtime€of€closing,€Ag€Services€was€not€paid€for€the€work€it€had€provided.€€HanesÏtestified€that€it€is€customary€for€the€purchaser€of€the€land€to€pay€the€fees€forÏinspection,€and€at€the€time€of€doing€the€work,€he€and€Scherer,€on€behalf€of€MichiganÏApple,€discussed€the€fees€for€the€various€phases€of€work.€€The€parties€later€agreed€toÏa€payment€plan,€and€Ag€Services€mailed€Scherer€a€promissory€note€which€he€signedÏas€president€of€Michigan€Apple€and€personally€guaranteed.€€The€note€stated€inÏpertinent€part:ÌÓ  Óò òñ+ññ-ñÓÓñ-ññ+ñà8 @` àà8@¸ ` ü!` ü!àPROMISSORY€NOTEó óÐ ° ÐÓ!ÓÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àò ò$36,816.00ó óà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àò òòòMARCH€4,€1996óóó óв ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àà È àò òMemphis,€Tennesseeó óÐ ´" ÐÌà ` àà8 ¸ àà  àFOR€VALUE€RECEIVED,€the€undersigned,€MichiganÏApple€Corp.€Inc.€.€.€.€promises€to€pay€to€the€order€of€UnitedÏAgricultural€Services,€Inc.,€.€.€.€the€principal€sum€of€òòThirty€sixÐ ¶&"" Ðthousand,€eight€hundred€sixteen€dollarsóó€($36,816.00),€togetherÐ ¶'## Ðwith€interest€thereon€from€date€hereof€until€paid,€at€the€rate€ofÏtwelve€percent€(12%)€per€annum.€€Payment€to€be€paid€in€sixÏmonthly€installments,€($6,136.00)€first€payment€to€be€due€andÏpayable€on€March€25,€1996€and€final€payment€due€August€25,Ï1996€.€.€.€.Ð ¸ ü!¸ ü! ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àà h à*à À àà  à*à p àà È à*ж.**¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÓ  ÓÌÓÅÓà ` àà8 ¸ àà  àJohn€Scherer,€Jr.,€General€Manager€and€Part„Owner,€soÏwarrants€that€he€is€duly€authorized€by€Michigan€Apple€Corp.,ÏInc.€to€sign€this€note€on€behalf€of€the€Corporation.€€This€note,Ïalso,€is€secured€by€the€personal€guarantee€of€John€Scherer,€Jr.Ð ¸ ü!¸ ü! ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àà h à*à À àà  à*à p àà È à*ж511¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà ` àà8 ¸ àà  àThis€note€is€made€and€executed€under,€and€is€in€allÏrespects€governed€by,€the€laws€of€the€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ¸ ü!¸ ü! ÐÐ ¶955 ÐÓÓà ` àScherer€and€Michigan€Apple€failed€to€make€timely€payments€on€the€note,€andÏon€October€28,€1997,€Ag€Services€filed€suit€against€Scherer€in€Shelby€CountyÏChancery€Court€for€breach€of€contract.€€Scherer€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss€based€onÏlack€of€òòin€personamóó€jurisdiction€by€the€courts€of€Tennessee.€€The€motion€to€dismissÐ °  Ðwas€denied€but€the€chancellor€granted€Scherer€an€interlocutory€appeal.€€However,€thisÏCourt€denied€the€application.€€Ìà ` àOn€October€6,€1998,€Scherer€filed€an€answer€to€the€complaint,€again€assertingÏlack€of€jurisdiction.€€After€a€nonjury€trial,€the€chancellor€entered€an€order€on€OctoberÏ28,€1998€awarding€a€judgment€to€Ag€Services€in€the€amount€of€$43,416.00€inÏdamages€and€$4,000.00€in€attorneysðð€fees.€€The€chancellor€found€in€pertinent€part:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àThat€initially€there€were€contacts€made€in€such€a€fashionÏfor€the€underlying€contract€that€would€not€give€rise€toÏjurisdiction€to€this€Court.€€However,€the€Court€finds€that,Ïafter€the€parties€continued€their€discussion€about€theÏdisagreement€on€the€payment€of€that€underlying€contract,Ïthe€Defendant€had€communications€with€the€Plaintiff€inÏthis€cause€knowing€that€the€Plaintiff€was€here€inÏTennessee,€and€the€Defendant€asked€the€Plaintiff,€whoÏwas€here€in€Tennessee,€to€prepare€the€underlyingÏdocument€that€is€before€the€Court€today,€the€promissoryÏnote.€€He€knew€œthat€that›€document€would€be€prepared€inÏTennessee,€and€it€would€be€sent€to€him€for€his€signature,Ïwhich€he€did.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àHe,€therefore,€in€this€Courtððs€opinion,€had€suchÏcontact€with€the€state€of€Tennessee€under€thoseÏcircumstances€that€were€at€least€minimal€contacts€suchÏthat€would€reasonably€place€him€on€notice€that€by€takingÏthat€extra€act€of€creating€this€document€to€be€in€the€freeÏflow€of€commerce€that€it€was€one€that€would€reasonablyÏcause€it€to€be€œhaled›€into€the€state€of€Tennessee.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àAccordingly,€therefore,€the€Court€finds€that€thisÏCourt€has€jurisdiction€over€this€matter.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÓÓÌà ` àScherer€has€appealed,€and€the€only€issue€for€review€is€whether€the€ShelbyÏCounty€Chancery€Court€had€òòin€personamóó€jurisdiction€over€him€under€the€TennesseeÐ °400 ÐLong„Arm€Statute.€€€Ìà ` àœñ+ññ-ññ+ñÔ‡X:ôXXX:ôÔñ+ññ-ññ+ñSince›€this€case€was€tried€by€the€trial€court€sitting€without€a€jury,€we€review€theÐ °844 Ðcase€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record€with€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€findings€of€factÐ °844 Ðby€the€trial€court.€€Unless€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€findings,€we€Ô#‡ X:ôXX X:ôB#ÔÔ‡X:ôXXX:ôÔmustÐ ° Ðaffirm,€absent€error€of€law.€€T.R.A.P.€13(d).Ô#‡ X:ôXX X:ô¬ #ÔÐ ° Ðà ` àScherer,€as€a€nonresident€of€Tennessee,€is€sued€pursuant€to€the€provisions€ofÏT.C.A.€ðð€20-2-214(a)€(1994),€which€provide€in€pertinent€part:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àò ò20-2-214.ó ó€€ò òJurisdiction€of€persons€unavailable€toÐ °  Ðpersonal€service€in€state--Classes€of€action€to€whichÏapplicable.ó ó--(a)€Persons€who€are€nonresidents€ofÐ ´  ÐTennessee€and€residents€of€Tennessee€who€are€outside€theÏstate€and€cannot€be€personally€served€with€process€withinÏthe€state€are€subject€to€the€jurisdiction€of€the€courts€ofÏthis€state€as€to€any€action€or€claim€for€relief€arising€from:Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(1)€The€transaction€of€any€business€within€the€state;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌÓ  Ó*€*€*ÌÓS$ÓÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(6)€Any€basis€not€inconsistent€with€the€constitution€ofÏthis€state€or€of€the€United€States;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌÓÓà ` àIn€addition,€T.C.A.€ðð€20„2„223€(Supp.€1998)€provides€in€pertinent€part:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àò ò20„2„223.€€Personal€jurisdiction€based€on€conduct.€ó ó€„Ð ¶ Ð(a)€A€court€may€exercise€personal€jurisdiction€over€aÏperson,€who€acts€directly€or€indirectly,€as€to€a€claim€forÏrelief€arising€from€the€personððs:Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ Ðà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(1)€Transacting€any€business€in€this€state;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ Ðà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(2)€Contracting€to€supply€services€or€things€in€this€state;Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h à*à À àà  à*à p àà È à*Ð ¸$  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!à(b)€When€jurisdiction€over€a€person€is€based€solely€uponÏthis€section,€only€a€claim€for€relief€arising€from€actsÏenumerated€in€this€section€may€be€asserted€against€thatÏperson.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌÓÓà ` àThe€Tennessee€long-arm€statute€confers€jurisdiction€to€the€full€extent€allowableÏunder€the€Due€Process€Clause€of€the€Fourteenth€Amendment€to€the€Constitution€ofÏthe€United€States.€€òòò òSouthland€Express,€Inc.€v.€Scrap€Metal€Buyers€of€Tampa,€Inc.ó óóó,Ð ¸/++ Ð895€S.W.2d€335,€338€(Tenn.€App.€1994).Ìà ` àIn€determining€whether€a€court€may€assert€òòin€personamóó€jurisdiction€over€aÐ ¼3 // Ðnonresident€defendant,€due€process€requires€that€the€defendant€have€certainÏ"minimum€contacts"€with€the€forum€state€"such€that€the€maintenance€of€the€suit€doesÏnot€offend€traditional€notions€of€fair€play€and€substantial€justice."€€òòò òInternational€ShoeÐ ¼9 55 ÐCo.€v.€Washingtonó óóó,€326€U.S.€310,€316,€66€S.€Ct.€154,€158,€90€L.€Ed.€95€(1945);òòò ò€€J.I.Ð ° ÐCase€Corp.€v.€Williamsó óóó,€832€S.W.2d€530,€531-32€(Tenn.€1992).€€The€Due€ProcessÐ ´ ÐClause€requires€"fair€warning€that€a€particular€activity€may€subject€[the€defendant]Ïto€the€jurisdiction€of€a€foreign€sovereign."€€òòò òBurger€King€Corp.€v.€Rudzewiczó óóó,€471€U.S.Ð ¸  Ð462,€472,€105€S.€Ct.€2174,€2182,€85€L.€Ed.2d€528€(1985)€(quoting€òòò òShaffer€v.Ð ¼  ÐHeitneró óóó,€433€U.S.€186,€218,€97€S.€Ct.€2569,€2587,€53€L.€Ed.2d€683€(1977)€(Stevens,Ð À  ÐJ.€concurring)).Ìà ` àCourts€recognize€two€types€of€in€personam€jurisdiction:€€general€jurisdictionÏand€specific€jurisdiction.€€òòò òThird€Nat'l€Bank€in€Nashville€v.€Wedge€Group€Inc.ó óóó,€882Ð Ä ÐF.2d€1087,€1089€(6th€Cir.€1989);€€òòò òShoney's€Inc.€v.€Chic€Can€ññœññEnter.ó óóó,ññ›ññññññ€922€S.W.2d€530,Ð È Ð537€(Tenn.€App.€1995).€€When€a€state€exercises€personal€jurisdiction€over€aÏdefendant€in€a€suit€not€arising€out€of€or€related€to€the€defendant's€contacts€with€theÏforum,€the€state€is€exercising€"general€jurisdiction"€over€the€defendant.€€òòò òHelicopterosÐ Ì ÐNacionales€De€Columbia,€S.A.€v.€Halló óóó,€466€U.S.€408,€414€n.€9,€104€S.€Ct.€1868,Ð Ð  Ð1872€n.€9,€80€L.€Ed.2d€404€(1984).€€When€a€state€exercises€personal€jurisdiction€overÏa€defendant€in€a€suit€arising€out€of€or€related€to€the€defendant's€contacts€with€theÏforum,€the€state€is€exercising€"specific€jurisdiction"€over€the€defendant.€€òòò òId.ó óóó€at€414€n.Ð Ô$$  Ð8,€104€S.€Ct.€at€1872€n.€8.Ìà ` àFor€a€court€to€exercise€generalòò€in€personamóó€jurisdiction€over€a€nonresidentÐ Ø(($$ Ðdefendant€without€violating€the€requirements€of€the€Due€Process€Clause,€the€proofÏmust€show€that€the€defendant€maintains€"continuous€and€systematic"€contacts€withÏthe€foreign€state.€€òòò òInternational€Shoe€Co.ó óóó,€326€U.S.€at€317,€66€S.€Ct.€at€159;€€òòò òJ.I.Ð Ø.(** ÐCase€Corp.ó óóó,€832€S.W.2d€at€532.€€"While€it€has€been€held€in€cases€.€.€.€that€continuousÐ Ü0,,, Ðactivity€of€some€sort€within€a€state€is€not€enough€to€support€the€demand€that€theÏcorporation€be€amenable€to€suits€unrelated€to€that€activity,€there€have€been€instancesÏin€which€the€continuous€corporate€operations€within€a€state€were€thought€to€be€soÏsubstantial€and€of€such€a€nature€as€to€justify€suit€against€it€on€causes€of€action€arisingÐ à8044 Ðfrom€dealings€entirely€distinct€from€those€activities."€€òòò òInternational€Shoe€Co.ó óóó,€326Ð ° ÐU.S.€at€318,€66€S.Ct.€at€159.€€There€is€no€basis€for€general€personal€jurisdiction€inÏthis€case.Ìà ` à€However,€in€the€absence€of€general€jurisdiction€resulting€from€continuous€andÏsystematic€contacts€with€the€forum€state,€specificòò€in€personamóó€jurisdiction€still€may€beÐ ´  Ðfound€when€a€commercial€actor€purposely€directs€his€activities€toward€citizens€of€theÏforum€state€and€litigation€results€from€injuries€arising€out€of€or€relating€to€thoseÏactivities.€€òòò òBurger€King€Corp.ó óóó,€471€U.S.€at€472,€105€S.€Ct.€at€2182;€€òòò òJ.I.€Case€Corp.ó óóó,Ð ´ Ð832€S.W.2d€at€532.€€€In€such€a€case,€"the€defendant's€conduct€and€connection€withÏthe€forum€State€are€such€that€he€should€reasonably€anticipate€being€haled€into€courtÏthere."€€òòò òWorld-Wide€Volkswagen€Corp.ó óóó,€444€U.S.€at€297,€100€S.€Ct.€at€567;€Ð ¸ Ðòòò òShoney's,€Inc.ó óóó,€922€S.W.2d€at€536.Ð ¼  Ðà ` àWhen€a€controversy€is€related€to€or€"arises€out€of"€a€defendant's€contacts€withÏthe€forum,€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€has€said€that€a€"relationship€among€theÏdefendant,€the€forum,€and€the€litigation"€is€the€essential€foundation€of€òòin€personamóóÐ À  Ðjurisdiction.€€òòò òHelicopteros€Nacionalesó óóó,€466€U.S.€at€414,€104€S.€Ct.€at€1872€(quotingÐ À" Ðòòò òShaffer€v.€Heitneró óóó,€433€U.S.€186,€204,€97€S.€Ct.€2569,€2579,€53€L.€Ed.2d€683Ð Ä$  Ð(1977)).Ìà ` àIn€òòò òMasada€Inv.€Corp.€v.€Allenó óóó,€697€S.W.2d€332€(Tenn.€1985),€the€TennesseeÐ È($$ ÐSupreme€Court€faced€the€question€of€jurisdiction€of€a€malpractice€suit€against€a€TexasÏlawyer€who€had€prepared€an€inaccurate€deed€for€the€transfer€of€real€estate€inÏMemphis,€Tennessee€at€the€request€of€a€Tennessee€resident.€€òòò òId.€ó óóóat€333.€€€The€CourtÐ Ì.** Ðstated:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àA€three-pronged€test€had€been€developed€to€determine€theÏouter€limits€of€personal€jurisdiction€based€on€a€single€act:€Ïthe€defendant€must€purposefully€avail€himself€of€theÏprivilege€of€acting€in€or€causing€a€consequence€in€theÏforum€State;€€the€cause€of€action€must€arise€from€theÏdefendant's€activities€there;€€and€defendant's€acts€orÏconsequences€must€have€a€substantial€connection€with€theÏforum€to€make€the€exercise€of€jurisdiction€reasonable.€Ð Ð9 55 Ðòòò òSouthern€Machine€Co.€v.€Mohasco€Industries,€Inc.ó óóó,€401Ð ° ÐF.2d€374,€381€(6th€Cir.€1968).€€Subsection€(6)€[of€theÏTennessee€long-arm€statute]€changed€the€long-arm€statuteÏfrom€a€"single€act"€statute€to€a€"minimum€contacts"€statuteÏwhich€expanded€the€jurisdiction€of€Tennessee€courts€toÏthe€full€limit€allowed€by€due€process.€€òòò òShelby€Mutual€Ins.Ð ²  ÐCo.€v.€Mooreó óóó,€645€S.W.2d€242,€245€(Tenn.€App.€1981).€Ð ´  ÐThat€decision,€quoting€extensively€from€òòò òGullett€v.€QantasÐ ¶  ÐAirways€Ltd.ó óóó,€417€F.Supp.€490€(M.D.€Tenn.€1975),Ð ¸  Ðnoted€that€the€òòò òMohascoó óóó€test€was€now€too€restrictive.€€TheÐ º  Ðòòò òMooreó óóó€court€noted€that€three€primary€factors€are€to€beÐ ¼  Ðconsidered€in€determining€whether€the€requisite€minimumÏcontacts€were€present:€€the€quantity€of€the€contacts,€theirÏnature€and€quality,€and€the€source€and€connection€of€theÏcause€of€action€with€those€contacts.€€Two€lesser€factors€toÏbe€considered€are€the€interest€of€the€forum€State€andÏconvenience.€€The€òòò òMooreó óóó€court€concluded:о¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà8¸ ¤¸ ¤àà h àThe€phrase€"fair€play€and€substantialÏjustice"€must€be€viewed€in€terms€of€whetherÏit€is€fair€and€substantially€just€to€bothÏparties€to€have€the€case€tried€in€the€stateÏwhere€the€plaintiff€has€chosen€to€bring€theÏaction.€€In€each€case,€the€quality€and€natureÏof€those€activities€in€relation€to€the€fair€andÏorderly€administration€of€the€law€must€beÏweighed.€€As€stated€above€in€òòò òQantasó óóó,€thisÐ À Ðmust€involve€some€subjective€valueÏjudgment€by€the€courts.€€Ð LL ÐÌà ` àà ¸ à645€S.W.2d€at€246.€€ÌÌÓÓòòò òMasada€Inv.€Corpó óóó.,€697€S.W.2d€at€334-35.€€€The€òòò òMasadaó óóó€Court€concluded€thatÐ Â$  Ð"[b]y€willfully€and€knowingly€choosing€to€prepare€legal€documents€which€would€beÏfiled€in€Tennessee€and€be€of€great€consequence€here,€Allen€purposely€availed€himselfÏof€the€privilege€of€doing€business€within€this€state."€€òòò òId.ó óóó€at€335.€€€The€Court€statedÐ Æ*&& Ðthat€"Tennessee€has€substantial€interest€in€the€outcome€of€this€litigation€and€is€theÏmost€convenient€forum€since€this€action€involves€a€Tennessee€defendant,€WTFF,ÏTennessee€property,€and€is€controlled€by€Tennessee€law."€€òòò òId.ó óóóÐ Ê0,, Ðà ` àIn€òòò òBurger€King€Corp.ó óóó,€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€stated:Ð Î2.. ÐÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àWhere€a€forum€seeks€to€assert€specific€jurisdictionÏover€an€out-of-state€defendant€who€has€not€consented€toÏsuit€there,€this€"fair€warning"€requirement€is€satisfied€ifÏthe€defendant€has€"purposefully€directed"€his€activities€atÏresidents€of€ññœññthe€forum,ññ›ññññññ€òòò òKeeton€v.€Hustler€Magazine,€Inc.ó óóó,Ð Ò8"44 Ð465€U.S.€770,€774,€104€S.€Ct.€1473,€1478,€79€L.€Ed.2dÐ Ô9$55 Ð790€(1984),€and€the€litigation€results€from€alleged€injuriesÏthat€"arise€out€of€or€relate€to"€those€activities,€òòò òHelicopterosÐ ° ÐNacionales€de€Colombia,€S.A.€v.€Halló óóó,€466€U.S.€408,€414,Ð ² Ð104€S.€Ct.€1868,€1872,€80€L.€Ed.2d€404€(1984).€.€.€.€€AndÏwith€respect€to€interstate€contractual€obligations,€we€haveÏemphasized€that€parties€who€"reach€out€beyond€one€stateÏand€create€continuing€relationships€and€obligations€withÏcitizens€of€another€state"€are€subject€to€regulation€andÏsanctions€in€the€other€State€for€the€consequences€of€theirÏactivities.€€òòò òTravelers€Health€Assn.€v.€Virginiaó óóó,€339€U.S.Ð ´   Ð643,€647,€70€S.€Ct.€927,€929,€94€L.€Ed.€1154€(1950).€ÏSee€also€€òòò òMcGee€v.€International€Life€Insurance€Co.ó óóó,€355Ð ¶  ÐU.S.€220,€222-223,€78€S.€Ct.€199,€200-201,€2€L.€Ed.2dÏ223€(1957).€Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àà h à*à À àà  à*à p àà È à*и¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àIn€defining€when€it€is€that€a€potential€defendant€shouldÏ"reasonably€anticipate"€out-of-state€litigation,€the€CourtÏfrequently€has€drawn€from€the€reasoning€of€òòò òHanson€v.Ð ¸ ÐDencklaó óóó,€357€U.S.€235,€253,€78€S.€Ct.€1228,€1239-1240,Ð º  Ð2€L.€Ed.2d€1283€(1958):Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà8¸ ¤¸ ¤à"The€unilateral€activity€of€those€who€claimÏsome€relationship€with€a€nonresidentÏdefendant€cannot€satisfy€the€requirement€ofÏcontact€with€the€forum€State.€€TheÏapplication€of€that€rule€will€vary€with€theÏquality€and€nature€of€the€defendant'sÏactivity,€but€it€is€essential€in€each€case€thatÏthere€be€some€act€by€which€the€defendantÏpurposefully€avails€itself€of€the€privilege€ofÏconducting€activities€within€the€forumÏState,€thus€invoking€the€benefits€andÏprotections€of€its€laws."€€Ð LL ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àThis€"purposeful€availment"€requirement€ensuresÏthat€a€defendant€will€not€be€haled€into€a€jurisdictionÏsolely€as€a€result€of€"random,"€"fortuitous,"€or€"attenuated"Ïcontacts,€òòò òKeeton€v.€Hustler€Magazine,€Inc.ó óóó,€465€U.S.€atÐ ¼+ '' Ð774,€104€S.€Ct.€at€1478;€€òòò òWorld-Wide€Volkswagen€Corp.Ð ¾,(( Ðv.€Woodsonó óóó,€òòò òsupraó óóó,€444€U.S.€at€299,€100€S.€Ct.€at€568,€orÐ À-)) Ðof€the€"unilateral€activity€of€another€party€or€a€thirdÏperson,"€òòò òHelicopteros€Nacionales€de€Colombia,€S.A.€v.Ð Â/++ ÐHalló óóó,€òòò òsupraó óóó,€466€U.S.€at€417,€104€S.€Ct.€at€1873.€€Ð Ä0,, ÐJurisdiction€is€proper,€however,€where€the€contactsÏproximately€result€from€actions€by€the€defendant€òòhimselfóóÐ Æ2.. Ðthat€create€a€"substantial€connection"€with€the€forumÏState.€€òòò òMcGee€v.€International€Life€Insurance€Co.ó óóó,€òòò òsupraó óóó,Ð Æ400 Ð355€U.S.€at€223,€78€S.€Ct.€at€201;€€see€also€òòò òKulko€v.Ð È511 ÐCalifornia€Superior€Courtó óóó,€òòò òsupraó óóó,€436€U.S.€at€94,€n.€7,€98Ð Ê622 ÐS.€Ct.€at€1698,€n.€7.€Thus€where€the€defendantÏ"deliberately"€has€engaged€in€significant€activities€withinÏa€State,€òòò òKeeton€v.€Hustler€Magazine,€Inc.ó óóó,€òòò òsupraó óóó,€465€U.S.Ð Ì955 Ðat€781,€104€S.€Ct.€at€1481,€or€has€created€"continuingÏobligations"€between€himself€and€residents€of€the€forum,Ð ° Ðòòò òTravelers€Health€Assn.€v.€Virginiaó óóó,€339€U.S.€at€648,€70Ð ° ÐS.€Ct.€at€929,€he€manifestly€has€availed€himself€of€theÏprivilege€of€conducting€business€there,€and€because€hisÏactivities€are€shielded€by€"the€benefits€and€protections"€ofÏthe€forum's€laws€it€is€presumptively€not€unreasonable€toÏrequire€him€to€submit€to€the€burdens€of€litigation€in€thatÏforum€as€well.€€Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àà  àà h à*à À àà  à*à p àà È à*в ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌòòò òÓÓBurger€King€Corp.ó óóó,€471€U.S.€at€472-76,€105€S.€Ct.€at€ññœññ2182-84.ññ›ññññññÐ ²  Ðà ` àIn€the€present€case,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€initial€interaction€betweenÏthe€parties€to€this€suit€involving€the€land€assessment€report€and€subsequent€cleanupÏdid€not€meet€the€requirements€for€minimum€contacts€to€allow€the€courts€ofÏTennessee€jurisdiction.€€However,€the€trial€court€also€found€that€subsequent€to€theÏinitial€interaction,€the€parties€entered€into€a€contract€whereby€Scherer€knew€AgÏServices€was€located€in€Tennessee,€and€knew€the€promissory€note€would€be€preparedÏin€Tennessee.€€These€factors,€the€trial€court€found,€were€sufficient€to€satisfy€theÏminimum€contacts€requirement,€and€give€Tennessee€courts€jurisdiction€over€Scherer.Ìà ` àTechnically,€we€agree€with€the€trial€courtððs€finding€ññœññas€it€pertains€to€Scherer€inÏregard€to€initialññ›ññ€interactions€of€the€ññœññpartiesññ.ññññ›€aññññ€ññññ€ññññs›€is›€pertains›€to›€Scherer.›€›€ññTheññ›ññññññ€proof€in€this€case€is€that€Ag€ServicesÏññœññand€ññ›ññññññMichigan€Apple,€acting€through€Scherer,€made€an€arrangement€whereby€AgÏServices€would€perform€a€service€in€connection€with€the€environmental€requirementsÏnecessary€for€a€loan€that€Schererððs€corporation€was€trying€to€obtain.€€The€workÏcontracted€for€required€visits€to€Michigan€but€more€importantly€Ag€Services€did€theÏfield€work€in€ññœññMichigan€thenññ›ññññññ€returned€to€its€office€in€Memphis€to€perform€necessaryÏanalyses,€compilations,€interpretations,€and€other€work€in€order€to€prepare€andÏsubmit€the€necessary€reports.€€It€is€undisputed€that€this€work€was€all€done€in€theÏMemphis€office.€€This€case€is€somewhat€analogous€to€the€factual€situation€in€ò òòòBondÐ ¶400 Ðv.€Montego€Bay€Dev.€Corp.ó óóó,€405€F.€Supp.€256€(W.D.€Tenn.€1975).€€In€that€case,Ð º6 22 ÐBond,€an€architect,€contracted€to€perform€architectural€services€for€the€ññœññdefendant.€ññ›ññññññÐ ¾844 ÐññœññTheññ›ññññññ€contract€was€signed€by€the€defendants€in€Maryland,€and€the€architect€went€toÏMaryland€for€the€on„site€work.€€However,€the€architect€returned€to€his€MemphisÏoffice€to€prepare€the€plans€and€specifications€for€this€out„of„state€project.€€AlthoughÏno€representative€of€the€defendants€ever€came€to€the€State€of€Tennessee,€the€CourtÏnoted€that€it€was€foreseeable€by€the€parties€that€at€least€a€substantial€part€of€the€workÏwould€be€performed€in€the€Memphis€office.€€The€Court€said:ÌÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` ü!` ü!àThat€no€representative€of€the€defendants€was€everÏphysically€in€Tennessee€is€not€a€controlling€consideration.€Ïò òòòMohascoó óóó,€òòò òsupraó óóó€at€382.€€As€stated€in€ò òòòMohasco,€supraó óóó€atÐ ° Ð382„383:€ðð.€.€.€business€is€transacted€in€a€state€whenÏobligations€created€by€the€defendant€or€businessÏoperations€set€in€motion€by€the€defendant€have€a€realisticÏimpact€on€the€commerce€of€the€state;€and€the€defendantÏhas€purposefully€availed€himself€of€the€opportunity€ofÏacting€there€if€he€should€have€reasonably€foreseen€that€theÏtransaction€would€have€consequences€in€that€state.ðð€€Here,Ïa€business€transaction€set€in€motion€by€defendants€had€aÏrealistic,€foreseeable€and€considerable€impact€onÏcommerce€in€Tennessee.€€Thus,€the€first€criterion€ofÏò òòòMohascoó óóó€is€met,€that€defendants€have€purposefully€availedÐ ² Ðthemselves€of€the€privilege€of€acting€or€causing€aÏconsequence€in€the€forum€state.Ð ¸ ¤¸ ¤ ÐÌ405€F.€Supp.€at€259„260.ÌÌÓÓà ` àAdmittedly,€in€the€instant€case€the€contract€was€between€the€foreignÏcorporation€and€Ag€Services,€but€the€defendant,€Scherer,€was€part€and€parcel€of€theÏnegotiations€and€activities€leading€to€the€contract.€€Scherer€acted€as€agent€for€theÏcorporation€and€his€action€created€a€consequence€in€Tennessee.€€Although€SchererÏcould€not€be€subjected€to€this€jurisdiction€for€his€activity€in€negotiating€the€contractÏas€agent,€the€corporation€would€meet€the€minimum€contacts€test.€€Ìà ` àHowever,€there€is€a€more€compelling€reason€for€establishing€personalÏjurisdiction€over€Scherer.€€Michigan€Appleððs€note€paid€for€the€services€under€theÏcontract€and€was€guaranteed€by€the€defendant€Scherer.€€The€note€specificallyÏprovided€for€payment€in€the€State€of€Tennessee.€€Thus,€Scherer€guaranteed€theÏpayment€of€sums€to€be€paid€in€Tennessee€by€virtue€of€the€note.€€This€comes€withinÏthe€provisions€of€T.C.A.€ðð€20„2„223(a)(2)€as€a€contract€to€supply€ð ðthingsðð€in€thisÐ ´955 Ðstate.Ìà ` àThe€claim€for€relief€by€Ag€Services€arises€from€the€default€in€the€payment€ofÏthis€note.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€T.C.A.€ðð€20„2„223(b).€€The€note€was€prepared€in€Tennessee,€isÐ ° Ðgoverned€by€Tennessee€law€by€the€terms€thereof,€and€payments€were€to€be€made€inÏTennessee.€€We€believe€this€satisfies€the€requirement€of€T.C.A.€ðð€20„2„223.Ìà ` àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€of€the€appeal€are€assessedÏagainst€the€appellant.€€The€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€such€furtherÏproceedings€as€may€be€necessary.ÌññÓÓññññññœññññññÔ‡Xº½XXXº½Ôà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p à_________________________________Ð ´ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€Ð ´ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€W.S.ó óÔ#‡ Xº½XX Xº½„p#ÔÐ ¶ ÐÌò òññññCONCUR:Ð ¸ ÐÌÌññññññó óññññò òññññññÔ‡Xº½XXXº½Ô____________________________________Ð ¾ ÐALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€JUDGEó óÔ#‡ Xº½XX Xº½ªr#ÔÐ À ÐÌò òÔ‡Xº½XXXº½Ô____________________________________Ð Â ÐHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€JUDGEó óÔ#‡ Xº½XX Xº½Ws#Ôññññññó óññññññ›ññœÔ†ÿÿÔÔ†ÿÿÔÔ  ÔÔ  Ôñ+ñ