Burnham v. Superior Court of California
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Burnham v. Superior Court | ||||||
 |
||||||
| Argued February 28, 1990 Decided May 29, 1990 |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full case name |
Dennis Burnham v. Superior Court of California, County of Marin
|
|||||
| Citations | 495 U.S. 604 (more) 110 S.Ct. 2105, 109 L.Ed.2d 631. |
|||||
| Holding | ||||||
| Personal jurisdiction can be had over a nonresident who was personally served with process while temporarily in that State, in a suit unrelated to his activities in the State. | ||||||
| Court membership | ||||||
|
||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||
| Majority | Scalia, joined by Rehnquist, Kennedy | |||||
| Concurrence | White | |||||
| Concurrence | Brennan, joined by Marshall, Blackmun, O'Connor | |||||
| Concurrence | Stevens | |||||
| Laws applied | ||||||
| U.S. Const. Amend. XIV | ||||||
Burnham v. Superior Court of California, was a United States Supreme Court case related to the issue of personal jurisdiction. Associate Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the majority opinion.
| “ |
The question presented is whether the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment denies California courts jurisdiction over a nonresident, who was personally served with process while temporarily in that State, in a suit unrelated to his activities in the State. … Because the Due Process Clause does not prohibit the California courts from exercising jurisdiction over petitioner based on the fact of in-state service of process, the judgment is Affirmed.[1] |
” |
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
[edit] References
- ^ Ides and May (2006). Civil Procedure Cases and Problems. Second Edition.. Aspen Publishers. ISBN 978-0735558892.
