|
HESS
v. PAWLOSKI
Facts:
While driving in Massachusetts, Hess, a resident of Pennsylvania,
negligently struck and injured Pawloski. Pawloski filed
suit against Hess in Massachusetts, under a statute where
non-residents consented to jurisdiction in the Mass. Courts if
they were involved in an accident on their roads. Hess
received actual notice of Pawloski’s suit and contested
jurisdiction. Jurisdiction was upheld by both the trial
court and the Supreme Judicial Ct. Hess appeared and
defended the case at trial but the jury found for Pawloski.
Hess appealed claiming the Mass. Courts lacked jurisdiction over
him and the provision for service of process was in violation of
his 14th Amendment Due Process rights.
Issue:
Does a state have the power to declare that all non-residents who
use its highways have impliedly consented to submit to the state’s
jurisdiction for all actions arising from that highway usage?
Rule: Yes,
a state does have the power to declare that all non-residents who
use its highways have impliedly consented to submit to the state’s
jurisdiction for all actions arising from that highway usage.
Application:
The non-resident demonstrates, by choosing to drive within the
state, that it is not so completely inaccessible or remote that
subjecting him to jurisdiction there would be totally unfair.
|
