WPC 2# U: % 0(b ?w@K4 0l 0D" 0Jf 0T 0^ 0hb 0r 0|< 0 0> 1u 0dC B AQ  0D 0@ 0D_ D/ B D3 U*" B)L DCu AM  av~{vHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh,  AZ"Arial RegularX($- - DUDUUUUӀ_#mes Ne3|x((3$ !      0  (#$  0  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X d!"#$&C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  ("$    ($$   1  ((' dxdP Pd'dxd<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d++++7Border 1dd!#,C << G  !  #d#*  ""  *   YYY FILED*XNovember7,1997CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk   W !#d#*     *       Unlessthecontactswiththisstateweresosubstantialandcontinuousthatthestatehadgeneraljurisdictionoverthedefendant.SeepartIIIofthisopinion.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ion-F Geneva  ion-F Geneva ! . *         \RA'\\RA'\7_XXdd7    ћ INTERNATIONALSUPPLYCO.,INC., )andLAURIEMEADOR,   )      ) Plaintiffs/Appellants,  )      ) AppealNo.      ) 01A019705CH00235VS.      )      ) SumnerChancery̜!R-.,A1-j|7`  `@Rߛ      ) No.96C289THEWARNERGROUPLTD.,  )      ) Defendant/Appellee.  )@ COURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ MIDDLESECTIONATNASHVILLEAPPEALEDFROMTHECHANCERYCOURTOFSUMNERCOUNTYATGALLATIN,TENNESSEETHEHONORABLETOME.GRAY,JUDGEWILLIAMH.LASSITER,JR.CHRISTOPHERM.MINTON213FifthAvenueNorthNashville,Tennessee37219 AttorneysforPlaintiffs/AppellantsGLENNB.ROSE1800FirstAmericanCenter315DeaderickStreetNashville,Tennessee37238 AttorneyforDefendant/Appellee@ AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED       BENH.CANTRELL,JUDGECONCUR:TODD,P.J.,M.S.̜BUSSART,J.  @ *OPINION *X  Thisappealinvolvesaquestionofpersonaljurisdictionoveranonresidentcorporation.TheChanceryCourtofSumnerCountydismissedtheϜcomplaint.Weaffirm.@ I.   TheplaintiffsareInternationalSupplyCo.,Inc.( International),aTennesseecorporation,andLaurieMeador,itssecretaryandvicepresident.Ms.MeadorresidesinSumnerCounty.ThedefendantisTheWarnerGroupLtd.( Warner),anOhiocorporationwithitsprincipalplaceofbusinesslocatedinTwinsburg,Ohio.In1996InternationalandWarnerwereengagedinlitigationintheUnitedStatesDistrictCourtfortheNorthernDistrictofOhio,wherethejuryreturneda$91,300verdictforWarner.  OnOctober15,1996counselforWarner,locatedinAkron,wrotethefollowinglettertoInternationalscounselinCleveland:8 8  IhavebeenadvisedbymyclientaswellasseveralofWarnerscustomersthatLaurieMeadorhascontactedorspokewiththemandhasliedthatISCwonthelawsuitspecificallyinanefforttodamageWarnersrelationshipswithitscustomers.ThisconductcoupledwithMs.MeadorsconductreferencedinmylettertoyouofApril1,1996aswellasyourownremarkstoMr.SpurgenofPeerBearingcreatesapatternofdefamationandharassmentdesignedtoinjureWarnerGroup.8 8  Beadvisedthatthisconductwillnot[sic]tolerated.UnlessyougiveuswrittenassurancesbycloseofbusinessFridayOctober16,1996thatyourclientwillretractherstatementsinwritingandwillceasecallingordiscussingwithWarnerscustomersthislitigation,suitwillbefiledagainstyourclientandMs.MeadorpersonallybycloseofbusinessMondayOctober21,1996forslanderandrelatedclaims.8 8  Yourpromptresponseisrequired.  OnOctober18,1996InternationalandMs.MeadorfiledthisactionintheChanceryCourtofSumnerCountyforadeclaratoryjudgmentthatwhatMs.Meadorsaiddidnotviolateanylawandthatshewasfreetomakeanysuchstatementsinthefuture.WarnermovedtodismissunderTenn.R.Civ.P.12.02(2)forlackofpersonaljurisdiction.ThemotionwasaccompaniedbyanaffidavitofWarnersvicepresidentcontainingthefollowingfactualallegations:8 8  8 8  4. DefendantWarnerGroup,Ltd.hasnoplaceofbusinessoremployeesinTennessee.WarnerGroup,Ltd.ownsnorealortangiblepropertylocatedinTennessee.DefendantWarnerGroupLtd.hasnotplacedanyadsinTennesseeanddirectsnoadvertisingspecificallytoTennessee.8 8  5. WarnerGroup,Ltd.hasonlytwocustomerslocatedinTennessee,oneofwhichislocatedinEastTennesseeandoneinMemphis.WarnerGroup,Ltd.hasnocontractforcontinuingpurchaseswithanycustomerinTennessee.SalestothesecustomersconstituteasmallpercentageofthetotalannualsalesofWarnerGroup,Ltd.8 8  6. IhavebeeninformedbymyOhioattorneythatInternationalSupplyCompanyhasappealedthejurysverdictinthelitigationwithWarnerGrouppendingintheUnitedStatesDistrictCourtfortheNorthernDistrictofOhio.Therearenocountervailingaffidavitsintherecord.@ II.   InTennesseethecourtshavebeengiventhepowertoexerciseinpersonamjurisdictionovernonresidentstotheextentallowedbytheConstitutionofthisstateoroftheUnitedStates.Tenn.CodeAnn.202214(a)(6).InInternationalShoeCo.v.Washington,326U.S.310,66S.Ct.154,90L.Ed.95(1945),theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtdeclaredthatinorderforastatetoexerciseinpersonamjurisdictionoveranonresidentdueprocessrequiresthatthenonresidenthaveenoughcontactwiththestatesothatmaintainingthesuitdoesnotoffend traditionalnotionsoffairplayandsubstantialjustice.326U.S.at316.InTennesseethecourtshaveconsistentlyappliedthis minimumcontactstest.DavisKiddBooksellersv.DayImpex,832S.W.2d572(Tenn.App.1992).  Theminimumcontactstestrequiresthateachcasebeexaminedtodeterminewhatcontactsthenonresidenthadwiththisstate.And,whenjurisdictionisbasedonminimumcontacts,thecauseofactionmustariseoutofthecontactwiththisstatereliedonasthebasisforjurisdiction.J.I.CaseCorp.v.Williams,832S.W.2d530(Tenn.1992).SeealsoTenn.CodeAnn.202223(b)(1997Supp.).Forexample,aforeigncorporationmaybuyorsellsubstantialquantitiesofgoodsinthisstate,givingthestatejurisdictionovercontroversiesrelatedtothegoods,butthestatewouldnothavejurisdictionoverthecorporationforpersonalinjuriesinflictedonaTennesseeresidentinOhio. /   כInBurgerKingCorp.v.Rudzewicz,471U.S.462,105S.Ct.2174,85L.Ed.2d528(1985),theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtsaidthatpersonaljurisdictioncanbeestablishedbyshowingthatthedefendanthas, purposelydirectedhisactivitiestowardcitizensoftheforumstateandlitigationresultsfrominjuriesarisingoutoforrelatingtothoseactivities.471U.S.at47273.̜  Inthiscasethedefendantshadsomeisolated,purposefulcontactswithTennessee,butthecauseofactionallegedbytheplaintiffshasnothingtodowiththosecontacts.ThiscontroversyaroseoutofaletterwrittenbythedefendantscounselinOhiotoInternationalscounselinOhio.AlthoughtheletterthreatenedlegalactionagainstaTennesseecorporationandanindividualresidentofTennesseetheletterdoesnotamounttothatpurposefulcontactwithTennesseethatisthebasisofpersonaljurisdiction.@ III.   Theappellantsalsoallegethattheywerenotallowedachancetodiscoverfactsthatmighthaveledtogeneraljurisdictionoverthedefendant.Generaljurisdiction(jurisdictionoveraforeigncorporationforcausesofactionwhichariseinanotherstate)maybeassertedwheretheforeigncorporationsactivitiesinthisstatearesubstantialandcontinuous.Perkinsv.BenguetMiningCo.,342U.S.437,72S.Ct.413,96L.Ed.485(1952);Walkerv.NationwideIns.Co.,813S.W.2d135(Tenn.App.1990).  Theplaintiff,however,didnotallegeanyfactsthatwouldleadtogeneraljurisdictionanddidnotcontrovertthedefendantsaffidavitaverringthatitscontactswithTennesseewereisolatedandsporadic.  Weareconvincedthatthelowercourtwasjustifiedinholdingthatthisstatelackedpersonaljurisdictionoverthedefendant.  ThejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmedandthecauseisremandedtotheChanceryCourtofSumnerCountyforanyfurtherproceedingsnecessary.Taxthecostsonappealtotheappellant.̛      _____________________________      BENH.CANTRELL,JUDGE̜CONCUR:̜_______________________________HENRYF.TODD,PRESIDINGJUDGEMIDDLESECTION_______________________________WALTERW.BUSSART,JUDGE   X   ќ