Pennoyer v Neff

Power, Consent, and Notice - Personal jurisdiction

Relevant Facts: The consolidation of two actions. One in the OR state cts, the other
Federal. In the first Mitchell and atty is suing his client, Neff, for unpaid legal fees
$300. At the time Neff was a “non-resident who was not personally served with process,
and did not appear.” Default was entered after constructive notice by publication. Neff
had acquired 300 acres of land and Michell had the sheriff seize and sell the
land. Pennoyer bought the land and Neff brought the second action forward to recover
possession of the land.

Legal Issue(s): Whether judgment for money rendered in the State court of Oregon
against Neff, then a non-resident of the State, without service of process, or his
appearance was without any validity, and the authorization of a sale of the property was
without due process of law?

Court’s Holding: Yes

Procedure: By consent of parties, and in pursuance of their written stipulation filed in the
case, the cause was tried by the court, and a special verdict given, upon which judgment
was rendered in favor of Neff; whereupon Pennoyer sued out this writ of
error . Affirmed.

Law or Rule(s): To give such proceedings validity, there must be a competent tribunal to
pass on the subject-matter of the suit; and in order to make a determination of the
personal liability of defendant, he must be brought within its jurisdiction by service of
process within the state, or by his voluntary appearance.

Court Rationale: The property here in controversy sold under the judgment rendered was
not attached, nor in any way brought under the jurisdiction of the court . Its first
connection with the case was caused by a levy of the execution. It was not disposed of
pursuant to any adjudication, but out of a money judgment, having no relation to the
property, rendered against a non resident w/o service of process or his
appearance. Publication of process or notice w/ the state where the tribunal sits cannot
create any greater obligation upon the non resident to appear: Process sent to him out of
the State, and process published w/i it are equally unavailing. To acquire jurisdiction by
attachment Oregon would have had to attach the property before the lawsuit. Substituted
service of process in actions against non residents is effectual only where the property in
the state is brought under the control of the court and subjected to its disposition by
process.

Plaintiff’s Argument: Due process requires either the appearance of df or service of

process before a judgment can be executed against him.
Defendant’s Argument: OR state law provides for constructive service of process when
an action is brought against a non resident and absent df, who has property in the state.

Constructive Notice - (fictional or pretend) an alternative method of fulfilling the legal

requirement of service of process, mail, publication, etc.