Thomas J. Palmer, Inc. v. Turkiye Is Bankasi A.
Decision Date | 25 April 1980 |
Citation | 105 Cal.App.3d 135,164 Cal.Rptr. 181 |
Parties | THOMAS J. PALMER, INC., a corporation, Lake Construction Company, Inc., a corporation, Kenneth G. Walker, an Individual, Thomas J. Palmer, an Individual, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. TURKIYE IS BANKASI A. S., Defendant and Respondent. Civ. 56588. |
Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Baum & Cohen, Leonard P. Baum, and Norman A. Mathews, Beverly Hills, for plaintiffs and appellants.
Ball, Hunt, Hart, Brown & Baerwitz, Joseph A. Ball, James Polish, and J. Steven Greenfeld, Beverly Hills, for defendant and respondent.
Plaintiffs appeal from an order of the trial court quashing out-of-state service of summons upon defendant Turkiye Is Bankasi, a Turkish national bank (hereinafter referred to as Turkish Bank). The order, which was based on the court's "opinion that the exercise of jurisdiction herein as against the defendant Turkiye Is Bankasi A.S. would be unreasonable" is expressly made appealable by Code of Civil Procedure section 904.1, subdivision (c).
The complaint names several defendants in addition to Turkish Bank. Its allegations are generally described in the opinion of Division One of this court in Crocker Nat. Bank v. Superior Court (1977) 68 Cal.App.3d 863, 866-868, 136 Cal.Rptr. 481, as follows:
The allegations concerning the alleged "common plan or scheme" require further description. Paragraph 29 of the complaint states: "The defendants herein, excluding the defendant Crocker National Bank, in doing the matters and things set forth herein, and in failing to do the matters and things set forth herein, did the same pursuant to a common plan, scheme, conspiracy, design and agreement among themselves, each acting as agent one for the other, with the permission, consent and authority of each other, to among other things": (1) obtain for themselves the benefits of the Coal Sales Agreement and of the letter of credit; and (2) place plaintiffs in the position where they would sustain a loss if Crocker made demand under said letter of credit. A thorough search of the complaint, however, fails to disclose any allegation that Turkish Bank itself either did or failed to do anything. There is only the general allegation that anything done by all the defendants was done with its consent and authority and as its agent, and the conclusory allegation that all the defendants except Crocker "are conducting themselves and dealing with each other so as to deprive 'NATISCO' and plaintiffs of the benefits" of the Coal Agreement and the financing contract.
Turkish Bank's motion to quash service of summons was made several months after the complaint had been filed. One ground for quashing the service was the claim that "(t)he courts of this state lack personal jurisdiction over Turkish Bank." It was supported by affidavits delineating the nature of Turkish Bank's connection with California and describing its participation in the issuance of a letter of guarantee in favor of Turkish Steel.
The affidavit of the manager of Turkish Bank's foreign department at the head office set forth the following facts relating to Turkish Bank's presence in California as bearing upon the question of general jurisdiction:
This affidavit specifies the various classes of banking transactions conducted, including "(1) the receipt and transmission of letters of credit, (2) processing documentary collections, (3) issuance and receipt of payment orders, (4) furnishing credit worthiness reports on Turkish Bank's customers in Turkey and (5) negotiating traveler's checks." The affidavit further states: "In order to assure prompt payment of such items as letters of credit and payment orders sent to correspondent banks in California, Turkish Bank maintains a single bank account with a correspondent bank in California."
A detailed description of the various categories of banking transactions follows. The only details in this respect pertinent to the issues on this appeal, however, are descriptions of the practices of the international banking community with respect to letter of credit transactions. These include transactions in which a letter of guarantee or "standby letter of credit" is employed. Most often, as in this case, a two-stage transaction occurs. The first stage is the issuance of a letter of credit or guarantee by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Rice Growers Assn. v. First National Bank
...also Sibley v. Superior Court, supra, 16 Cal.3d 442, 445-446, 128 Cal.Rptr. 34, 546 P.2d 322; Thomas J. Palmer, Inc. v. Turkiye Is Bankasi A.S. (1980) 105 Cal.App.3d 135, 152, 164 Cal.Rptr. 181; Quattrone v. Superior Court (1975) 44 Cal.App.3d 296, 306, 118 Cal.Rptr. 548; Floyd J. Harkness ......
-
Integral Development Corp. v. Weissenbach
...trial court resolves those disputes and the substantial evidence standard governs our review. (Thomas J. Palmer, Inc. v. Turkiye Is Bankasi A.S. (1980) 105 Cal.App.3d 135, 145, 164 Cal. Rptr. 181.) The ultimate question whether jurisdiction is fair and reasonable under all of the circumstan......
-
California Overseas Bank v. French American Banking Corp.
...to establish the existence of the court's jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence. (Thomas J. Palmer, Inc. v. Turkiye Is Bankasi A.S. (1980) 105 Cal.App.3d 135, 146, 164 Cal.Rptr. 181.) On review, the finding of the trial court will be upheld if the evidence, when viewed most favora......
-
Pacific Atlantic Trading Co., Inc. v. M/V Main Exp.
...for services rendered elsewhere does not provide a basis for jurisdiction in this state." Thomas J. Palmer, Inc. v. Turkiye Is Bankasi, 105 Cal.App.3d 135, 154, 164 Cal.Rptr. 181 (1980). Finally, the district court found that as a result of appellants' purposeful availment of the California......