Hammerstein v. Superior Court of California et al. (340 U.S. 622)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided March 26, 1951 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 340 U.S. 622 · 71 S. Ct. 521
- Docket
- No. 421
- Argued
- March 9, 1951
- Decided
- March 26, 1951
- Term
- October Term 1950
- Vote
- 9–0
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Stay, petition, or motion granted
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
How the Justices voted
- Majority
- Chief Justice Vinson, Justice Black, Justice Reed, Justice Frankfurter, Justice Douglas, Justice R. H. Jackson, Justice Burton, Justice Clark, Justice Minton
Opinion excerpt
Per Curiam. In this case the respondent Reggie Hammerstein, by her mother and guardian, commenced a paternity action against the petitioner in the Superior Court of California. Petitioner entered a special appearance in that court, alleging that it had no personal jurisdiction over him, as he was a New York resident. He moved to quash the service upon him in New York on the grounds that any judgment obtained against him in this proceeding would deprive him of due process. The motion to quash was denied. The superior court entered judgment for the respondent. Prior to the entry of the judgment, petitioner filed a petition for a writ of prohibition in the District Court of Appeal. This petition was denied without opinion. The California Supreme Court denied his application for a hearing. After judgment, petitioner filed in the California Supreme Court a petition for a writ of certiorari to review the superior court proceedings. The California Supreme Court denied this petition without opinion. We granted certiorari, 340 U. S. 919 (1951). Throughout these proceedings, petitioner preserved his federal questions, but since neither of the decisions below was accompanied by an opinion, it is not clear whether the California courts found it necessary to decide any federal question. If their judgments rest upon an adequate state ground, we, of course, will not review those judgments.…
Excerpt of a 2,176-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.