Diamond A Cattle Co. v. Broadbent

• Decision Date: 05 January 1973
• Docket Number: No. 9503,9503
• Citation: 1973 NMSC 4,505 P.2d 64,84 N.M. 469
• Parties: The DIAMOND A CATTLE COMPANY, a New Mexico corporation, Plaintiff- Appellee, v. J. R. BROADBENT, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: New Mexico Supreme Court

Page 64

505 P.2d 64

84 N.M. 469

The DIAMOND A CATTLE COMPANY, a New Mexico corporation Plaintiff- Appellee, v. J. R. BROADBENT, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 9503.

Supreme Court of New Mexico.

Jan. 5, 1973.

Atwood, Malone, Mann & Cooter, Robert A. Johnson, Paul A. Cooter, Roswell, for appellant

Jennings, Christy & Copple, Roswell, for appellee.

OPINION

McMANUS, Chief Justice. In February, 1968, a joint venture was formed between the parties for the purpose of buying and selling cattle. Under the terms of the venture, plaintiff, The Diamond A Cattle Company, would advance or arrange for all necessary funds and supervise the fiscal and accounting operations. All costs, expenses, profits, and losses of the venture were to be borne equally by plaintiff and defendant, J. R. Broadbent. From time to time, after February, 1968, plaintiff advanced all funds for the purchase of cattle, paid all costs and expenses incurred by the venture, and credited all payments received to the accounts of plaintiff and defendant equally.

None of the contracts entered into by the joint venture were negotiated or signed in New Mexico and none of the cattle were purchased, pastured or sold in New Mexico. Defendant is not a resident of this state and only entered it on November 24, 1969, to discuss the joint venture with employees of plaintiff. In addition, plaintiff itself, by merging with a New Mexico corporation, only became a resident of the state in December, 1968, well after all of the essential cattle transactions had been accomplished between the venture and a third party. Now, with plaintiff seeking contribution from defendant for losses incurred by the joint venture, we are presented with an appeal which asks the question: Do New Mexico courts have personal jurisdiction over this defendant pursuant to the provisions of § 21--3--16, N.M.S.A.1953, the state's 'long arm' statute? Below, the District Court of Chaves County concluded that it had jurisdiction. We reverse.

The applicable portions of § 21--3--16, supra, are:

'A. Any person, whether or not a citizen or resident of this state, who in person or through an agent does any of the acts enumerated in this subsection thereby submits himself or his personal representative to the jurisdiction of the courts of this state as to any cause of action arising from:

'(1) The transaction of any business within this state * * *.'

Following are the trial court's findings of fact relating to acts performed in New Mexico by defendant which allegedly constitute the transaction of business:

'10. From time to time without protest or limitation, defendant made payments to plaintiff at its office in Roswell, New Mexico, on the amounts which (plaintiff) had advanced to the joint account and business venture on his behalf * * *.

'11. On November 24, 1969, defendant met with officers of plaintiff in Roswell, New Mexico, for the purpose of concluding the affairs of the business venture and settling his obligation to plaintiff. At the meeting in Roswell, New Mexico,...