agree which documents evince their agreement. Smart Call argues the unsigned service agree ment, which requires any disputes to be submitted to arbitration in Ohio under Ohio law, is the contract. Conceding the document is unsigned and does not name Genio as a party, Smart Call argues the accompanying e-mails constitute written confirmation of its terms sufficient to make the contract enforceable. See Tex. Bus. & Com.Code § 2.201(b) (providing an unsigned contract for goods may be enforceable upon written confirmation of the contract’s terms). Smart Call further argues the forum-selection clause is evidence of Smart Call’s intent to avoid availing itself of the benefits and protections of Texas law. See Michiana, 168 S.W.3d at 792 (citing Burger King, 471 U.S. at 482, 105 S.Ct. 2174) (<HOLDING>). Further, because all of its negotiations with
holding that rule of construction that specific statutory provisions control general ones should not be applied where provisions can be harmonized holding that contracts should be interpreted to give effect to all provisions holding that related provisions should be read together holding choiceoflaw provisions should be considered when determining purposeful availment recognizing that totality of circumstances must be considered in determining permissible inferences