With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". in New Mexico and do not own any real or personal property in New Mexico. The only contact they have had with New Mexico is to have been guarantors on a loan agreement executed in California, which was entered into pursuant to an agreement which Deerfield and First City had already worked out in New Mexico. The Hiatts “stepped into a business arrangement which [Deerfield] and [ d.2d 89 (1976); accord United Buying Group, Inc. v. Coleman, 296 N.C. 510, 251 S.E.2d 610, 616 (1979) (“The mere act of signing [a guaranty in favor of a resident of the forum] or endorsement does not in and of itself constitute a sufficient contact upon which to base in personam jurisdiction over a nonresident.”); Basic Food Indus., Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 94 Nev. 111, 575 P.2d 934, 936 (1978) (<HOLDING>). The FDIC urges us to find that the Hiatts are

A: holding no personal jurisdiction over nonresident guarantor
B: holding that when no more appears than that the guarantor has mechanically executed the guaranty and mailed it back to the forum finding personal jurisdiction would offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice
C: holding that being a guarantor along with making payments in forum state is an insufficient basis to invoke personal jurisdiction
D: holding that when nonresident defendant has purposefully established minimum contacts texas courts exercise of personal jurisdiction will not comport with fair play and substantial justice only in rare cases
B.