Solano

INTRODUCTION

The appeal is taken from an order granting respondents’ motion to quash service of summons for lack of personal jurisdiction. Appellants are five California residents who individually invested money in a series of condominium construction projects in Panama. Respondents, three Panamanian real estate developers and two of their corporate officers, at various times met, corresponded, and/or contracted with the California appellants in connection with the Panama condominium construction projects. Appellants contend the trial court erred in granting the motion to quash because they satisfied their burden of producing competent evidence showing that each of the respondents had the requisite minimum contacts with California for California to exercise specific jurisdiction and respondents failed to present a compelling case showing the exercise of jurisdiction would be unfair. We agree. For the reasons stated below, we reverse the order and remand for further proceedings in light of the court’s opinion.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND1

A. The Parties Solano and his wife, Gloria Solano Canton; Molina; Pablo Saldana (Saldana); and Maria Lorena Batanero (Batanero) are…