of substantive law, not jurisdictional issues. Statutory liability does not equate to, and is not a substitute for, the due-process requirement that a defendant must purposefully direct its conduct into a forum state. See Kelly, 301 S.W.3d at 660 (“A state is powerless to create jurisdiction over a nonresident by establishing a remedy for a private wrong and a mechanism to seek that relief. Instead, jurisdictional analysis always centers on the defendant’s actions and choices to enter the forum state and conduct business.”). Accepting Compass’s argument would improperly shift the focus from the relationship between the defendant, the forum, and the litigation to the relationship among the plaintiff, the forum, and the litigation. See Michiana Easy Livin’ Country, 168 S.W.3d at 790 (<HOLDING>). Finally, Compass appears to assert that Zabel
holding order dismissing action without prejudice based on contractual forum selection clause is final and appealable because it terminates the litigation in the plaintiffs chosen forum holding that foreseeability of causing injury in forum state is not sufficient for specific personal jurisdiction holding that directing a tort at texas does not establish specific personal jurisdiction because it focus on relationship between plaintiff forum and litigation rather than defendant forum and litigation recognizing that where plaintiff is from the forum state and defendant is from an alternate forum each forum can claim a connection to one of the parties holding that plaintiff cannot be the only link between the defendant and the forum