Jason R. Searcy, as Trustee of the Exempt Assets Trust, Petitioner v. Parex Resources, Inc., Respondent; Jason R…

Summary

The Texas Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals, holding that Texas courts lack both specific and general jurisdiction over Parex Canada and Parex Bermuda, but do have specific (not general) jurisdiction over Ramshorn. The Court rejected the argument that Parex Canada’s contacts with Texas were purposeful, deeming them fortuitous and attenuated, while recognizing the direct Texas‑based conduct of Ramshorn’s executives. A concurring/dissenting opinion argued the opposite on Parex Canada.