sign a guaranty for a New Mexico corporation in which they had no interest. The Hiatts did not purposefully avail themselves of the benefits and protections of New Mexico law by merely guaranteeing a loan, and hence their activity does not meet the due process requirement of minimum contacts. The judgment of the trial court is REVERSED. IT IS SO ORDERED. RANSOM, FRANCHINI and FROST, JJ., concur. MONTGOMERY, C.J., Dissenting. 1 . After the filing of the complaint, First City changed its name to Moncor Bank, N.A., which later went into receivership, and FDIC ultimately succeeded to its interest. 2 . Even had such a clause existed, it is unclear whether that would have been enough to confer personal jurisdiction. See Telco Leasing, Inc. v. Marshall County Hosp., 586 F.2d 49 (7th Cir.1978) (<HOLDING>); see also Northern Trust Co. v. Randolph C.
holding that under texas choice of law principles contractual choice of law provisions are generally upheld holding that party waived an objection to choice of law holding that a choice of law provision in a lease did not serve as a basis for jurisdiction holding that the defendants failure to timely serve a notice of appeal and docketing statement did not prejudice the plaintiff and therefore would not serve as a basis to dismiss the appeal holding that tort law and the law of punitive damages are not controlled by the contract choice of law provision