Burnham v. Superior Court

Facts

Dennis Burnham married Francie Burnham in 1976 in West Virginia. In 1977 they moved to New Jersey, where their two children were born. In July 1987 they decided to separate. They agreed that Mrs. Burnham, who planned to move to California, would take custody of the children, and that she would file for divorce on grounds of irreconcilable differences. In October 1987 Mr. Burnham filed for divorce in a New Jersey state court on grounds of desertion. He did not obtain a summons against his wife or try to serve her. Mrs. Burnham demanded, without success, that he keep to their agreement. In early January 1988 she sued for divorce in a California state court. In late January, Mr. Burnham visited southern California on business. He then went north to visit his children in the San Francisco Bay area, where his wife lived, and took the older child to San Francisco for the weekend. On January 24, 1988, when he brought the child back to Mrs. Burnham's home, he was served with a California court summons and a copy of her divorce petition. He then returned to New Jersey.

Issues

1. Does the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment bar a state court from exercising jurisdiction over a nonresident who was personally served with process while briefly in the State, in a suit unrelated to his activities there?
2. Do International Shoe and Shaffer v. Heitner require that a defendant served while present in the State also have contacts with the State that relate to the suit?

Holding

Because Burnham was personally served with process while he was in California, the Due Process Clause did not prohibit the California courts from exercising jurisdiction over him in his wife's divorce suit, even though the suit did not arise from his activities there. All four opinions agreed that the judgment should be affirmed, but they gave different reasons.