Pennoyer v. Neff

Facts

J. H. Mitchell sued Neff in an Oregon state court on a claim for services as an attorney. When the suit began, Neff did not live in Oregon. Oregon's code allowed service by publication, meaning notice printed in a newspaper, on a non-resident who had property in the State, and Mitchell's summons was served that way. Neff was not personally served with process and did not appear. In February 1866 Mitchell won a judgment by default, because Neff never answered, for less than $300, including costs. Neff was still a non-resident when the judgment was entered. The land later in dispute was not attached (seized by court order at the start of a suit) and was not in any way brought under the court's control. Its first connection with Mitchell's case came when execution (the seizure and sale of property to enforce a judgment) was levied on it after judgment. The land was sold on that execution, and Pennoyer claimed it under the sheriff's deed. Neff then sued Pennoyer to recover the tract, which lay in Oregon and was alleged to be worth $15,000. He claimed title under a patent the United States issued to him in 1866 under the Donation Law of Oregon.

Issues

1. Can a state court enter a personal judgment that binds a non-resident defendant who was served only by publication and never appeared?
2. If the non-resident owns property in the State, can a personal judgment of that kind support a sale of the property when the property was not attached or otherwise brought under the court's control before judgment?

Holding

Mitchell sued for a personal money judgment against a non-resident who was not served in Oregon and did not appear, so the Oregon court had no jurisdiction over Neff and its judgment was void. The suit was not aimed at the land, and the land was not attached at the outset, so the judgment could not stand as a proceeding against the property either. It did not authorize the sheriff's sale, and Pennoyer's deed gave him no title.