Evans Geophysical v. Ramsey Associated, 31746.

• Decision Date: 18 May 2005
• Docket Number: No. 31746.,31746.
• Citation: 614 S.E.2d 692
• Parties: EVANS GEOPHYSICAL, INC., a corporation, Plaintiff Below, Appellant v. RAMSEY ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM, INC., a corporation, Defendant Below, Appellee.
• Court: West Virginia Supreme Court

614 S.E.2d 692

EVANS GEOPHYSICAL, INC., a corporation, Plaintiff Below, Appellant v. RAMSEY ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM, INC., a corporation, Defendant Below, Appellee.

No. 31746.

Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.

Submitted January 12, 2005.

Decided May 18, 2005.

Carl J. Dascoli, Jr., Esq., Law Office of Michael R. Cline, Charleston, for Appellant.

William C. Martin, Esq., Sutton, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant Evans Geophysical, Inc. appeals from a Gilmer County circuit court order that denied the appellant's motion for reconsideration of the final order that voided a Michigan default judgment in favor of the appellant against the appellee, Ramsey Associated Petroleum, Inc., and permanently stayed execution of the Michigan judgment.

We affirm the circuit court's order.

I.

The appellant, Evans Geophysical, Inc. ("Evans"), a Michigan corporation, is in the business of providing geological data to oil and gas companies, including seismic surveys of underground oil and gas prospects. The appellee, Ramsey Associated Petroleum, Inc. ("Ramsey"), is a Delaware oil and gas company authorized to do business in West Virginia, located in Glenville, Gilmer County.

In August of 2001, Annette Evans, the appellant's principal, appeared at a symposium in Morgantown, West Virginia, and promoted the services of appellant Evans. At the time of the symposium, the appellant had contracted with a group of six oil and gas companies interested in conducting a seismic survey in West Virginia.¹ Ramsey, the appellee, expressed interest in joining the group. Through their representatives, Evans and Ramsey entered into negotiations to join with the other six companies; during negotiations the parties communicated sparingly by letters, facsimile, and telephone.

Ultimately, Evans prepared an agreement in Michigan and faxed an offer to Ramsey's office in West Virginia. Ramsey received the faxed agreement, but Ramsey's president denies that he signed the agreement or otherwise agreed to pay any of the costs connected with the seismic survey.

The seismic survey was conducted, and Evans sent Ramsey an invoice for Ramsey's share of the costs — approximately $22,000.00. Ramsey did not pay the invoice. After attempting to collect payment from Ramsey, Evans filed an action against Ramsey in a Michigan district court. Ramsey strategically chose not to defend the action in Michigan, or otherwise submit the company to the jurisdiction of the Michigan courts.

In July of 2001, a Michigan district court conducted a bench trial, and later entered a default judgment against Ramsey. In its order, the Michigan court found that Ramsey had sufficient contact with the state of Michigan to establish limited personal jurisdiction, and awarded Evans a judgment in the amount of $21,805.46, Ramsey's share of the seismic survey cost.

In February of 2003, Evans sought to enforce the Michigan default judgment in the Gilmer County Circuit Court. In response, Ramsey filed motions to stay enforcement of the foreign default judgment and to vacate judgment, arguing that the Michigan court lacked limited personal jurisdiction over the appellee.

The circuit court granted a 90-day stay of enforcement of the judgment, and scheduled a hearing on Ramsey's motion to vacate the foreign judgment.

In June of 2003, the circuit court held a bench trial at which both parties presented evidence as to whether the Michigan court properly determined that the appellee satisfied the "minimum contacts" standards for limited personal jurisdiction under Michigan's long-arm statute.

In an eight-page order, the West Virginia circuit court, on August 4, 2003, applying Michigan law, found that there was insufficient evidence to support limited personal jurisdiction over Ramsey in Michigan. As a result, the circuit court vacated the Michigan judgment and permanently stayed execution of the judgment.

The appellant, Evans, then filed a motion for the circuit court to reconsider its order. On September 22, 2003, the circuit court conducted a hearing on the motion for reconsideration.

On November 20, 2003, the circuit court entered an order denying the appellant's motion for reconsideration. In its order, the circuit court found no reason to disturb its August 4, 2003 final order, and that no basis or other justification existed to grant relief to the appellant Evans. The appellant appeals from the November 20, 2003 order.

II.

"In reviewing challenges to the findings and conclusions of the circuit court, we apply a two-prong deferential standard of review. We review the final order and the ultimate disposition under an abuse of discretion standard, and we review the circuit court's underlying factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard. Questions of law are subject to a de novo review." Syllabus Point 2, Walker v. West Virginia Ethics Commission, 201 W.Va. 108, 492 S.E.2d 167 (1997).

The appellant Evans sought enforcement of its Michigan judgment against the appellee Ramsey under the West Virginia Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act, W.Va.Code, 55-14-2 [1989]. A foreign judgment is "any order, judgment, decree or order of a court of the United States or of any other court which is entitled to full faith and credit in this state." W.Va.Code, 55-14-2 [1997]. For a judgment to be entitled to full faith and credit, the court issuing the judgment must have personal jurisdiction over the entity against whom the judgment...