Case brief summary
A state court can make a legal decision about someone if they are personally given the lawsuit papers while voluntarily in the state, even if the visit had nothing to do with the lawsuit.
Facts
A husband and wife separated. She moved to California with their kids. During a short visit to see them, he was personally handed divorce papers from a California court.
Procedural history
The husband asked California courts to dismiss the case, arguing his short visit wasn't enough to give the state power over him. Lower courts disagreed, and the Supreme Court took the case.
Issue
Does it violate the Due Process Clause for a state court to have power over someone who was personally given legal papers while temporarily in that state, when the lawsuit is unrelated to what brought him there?
Holding
No. Being physically present in a state and personally served with legal papers there is enough, by itself, for that state's courts to have power over the person, even if the case has nothing to do with the visit.
Reasoning
The Court explained that this rule of serving someone papers while they are physically in the state has been a continuous and widely accepted practice in American law since before the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, and every state still follows it today. Because the rule has this long, unbroken tradition, it automatically satisfies the constitutional requirement of fair play and justice, and a separate test asking whether the person has enough ongoing connections to the state (used in cases where the person is not present) does not apply here.
Opinions
Majority (Scalia): A visitor who is personally handed divorce papers while in a state can be sued there, because this rule has always been part of American legal tradition and all states still use it.
Concurrences (White, Brennan joined by Marshall, Blackmun, and O'Connor, and Stevens): All agreed the result was correct, but disagreed on reasoning, some stressing fairness factors and modern reasonableness rather than tradition alone.