Jurisdiction — personal-minimum contacts
The decision of the Court of Appeals that the nonresident defendants had insufficient contacts with this state to give the courts of this state personal jurisdiction over them in an action by plaintiff law firm to recover for legal services purportedly performed for them is reversed for the reason stated in the dissenting opinion that defendants had sufficient contacts by their business activities, including retaining two other law firms in this state to represent them on the underlying matters giving rise to this action.
PER CURIAM.
For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals.
REVERSED.
Justices ORR and EDMUNDS did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.