Hess v. Pawloski
274 U.S. 352 · Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
Facts
A resident of Pennsylvania negligently drove a motor vehicle on a public highway in Massachusetts. This vehicle struck and injured a resident of Massachusetts. The injured party brought an action to recover damages for personal injuries. The Pennsylvania resident was not personally served within Massachusetts, nor was any of his property attached. Service of process was made in compliance with a Massachusetts statute that allowed for service on the Registrar for non-residents involved in accidents on public ways.
Procedural history
The plaintiff in error appeared specially to contest jurisdiction, filing an answer in abatement and moving to dismiss, which a lower court overruled. The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts held the statute valid and affirmed the order. After a jury returned a verdict for the defendant in error, the Supreme Judicial Court again overruled exceptions. The Superior Court then entered judgment, and a writ of error was allowed by the chief justice of that court, bringing the case here.
Issue
Does a Massachusetts statute, which deems a non-resident's use of its public highways as equivalent to appointing a state official for service of process in accident-related lawsuits, violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?
Holding
The Massachusetts enactment does not contravene the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The judgment of the lower court was affirmed.
Rule
A state has the power to regulate the use of its highways by non-residents, as motor vehicles are dangerous machines. A state may declare that a non-resident's use of its highways is equivalent to an appointment of a state official as an agent for service of process in proceedings arising from such use. This implied consent is valid under the Due Process Clause if it is limited to proceedings growing out of accidents on the highway, requires actual notice to the non-resident, and provides a reasonable opportunity for defense.
Read the full opinion on CourtListener
Case brief last reviewed . Prepared by CaseReader from the published opinion.