Document: 341 U.S. 609 71 S.Ct. 980 95 L.Ed. 1212 HUGHESv.FETTER et al. No. 355. Argued March 1, 2, 1951. Decided June 4, Mr. Samuel Goldenberg, Milwaukee, Wis., for appellants. Herbert L. Wible, appellees. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Basing his complaint on Illinois wrongful death statute,1 appellant administrator brought this action in Wisconsin state court to recover damages Harold Hughes, who was fatally injured an automobile accident Illinois. The allegedly negligent driver and insurance company were named as defendants. On their motion trial entered summary judgment 'dismissing merits.' It held that a statute, which creates right only deaths caused state, establishes local public policy against Wisconsin's entertaining suits under acts other states.2 Supreme Court affirmed, notwithstanding contention statute so construed violated Full Faith Credit Clause Art. IV, § Constitution.3 case is properly here appeal 28 U.S.C. 1257. 2 We are called upon decide narrow question whether Wisconsin, over objection raised, can close doors its courts cause created by act.4 Prior decisions have established 'public act' within provision 'Full shall be given each State Acts * every State.'5 also settled cannot escape constitutional obligation enforce rights duties validly laws states simple device removing jurisdiction from otherwise competent.6 recognized, however, full faith credit does not automatically compel forum subordinate own statutory conflicting act another state; rather, it choose between competing policies involved.7 clash interests cases type has usually been described conflict two or more states.8 basic involved present appeal, follows: one hand strong unifying principle embodied looking toward maximum enforcement obligations recognized statutes sister states;9 interpreted highest court, permitting entertain action.10 3 hold must give way. That no real feeling antagonism general.11 To contrary, regularly provided nature, exclusionary rule extending far bar actions locally.12 policy, moreover, considered application non conveniens doctrine, whatever effect doctrine might if use resulted denying states. Even we assume could refuse, reason particular circumstances, hear foreign controversies nonresidents parties,13 lacking relationship with state. For appellant, decedent individual defendant all residents but appointed corporate laws. think relevant, although crucial here, may well service had original matter defendant.14 And while apparently substituted service,15 amount deprivation opportunity valid claims 4 Under these conclude excludes forbidden national Clause.16 reversed remanded proceedings inconsistent opinion. 5 Reversed remanded. 6 FRANKFURTER, whom REED, JACKSON, MINTON, join, dissenting. 7 This G. Hughes. Hughes killed An provides occurring State. Smith-Hurd's Ill.Ann.Stat. c. 70, §§ 2. A outside Wisconsin. Wis.Stat., 1949, 331.03. courts, obeying command dismissed action. I agree applied, contrary United States Constitution: Acts, Records, judicial Proceedings State.' 8 derived similar Articles Confederation. par. 3. clue meaning available records Constitutional Convention notation Madison's Debates 'Mr. Wilson & Docr. Johnson (who became members committee referred) supposed Judgments should ground States, Legislatures included, sake insolvency etc—.' II Farrand, Records Federal Convention, 447. has, good reason, gone requiring respect judgments States. Fauntleroy v. Lum, 210 230, 641, 52 1039; Kenney Lodge, 252 411, 40 371, 64 638; Milwaukee County M. E. White Co., 296 268, 56 229, 80 220; cf. Magnolia Petroleum Co. Hunt, 320 430, 208, 88 149. But extent recognize clear. 9 1. In field commercial law—where certainty high importance—we often imposed rather rigid defer law incorporation, place contract. Thus, Broderick Rosner, 294 629, 55 589, 79 1100, New Jersey stockholder liability arising York. already said, Converse Hamilton, 224 243, 260, 32 415, 419, 749, such 'peculiarly regulatory power' incorporation; 'so much said any thereon.' John Hancock Mut. Life Insurance Yates, 299 178, 57 129, 81 106, Georgia York parole evidence prevented recovery contract made both cases, Court, speaking through Brandeis, emphasized applicable. 10 Pink A.A.A. Highway Express, 314 201, 62 241, 86 152, found did require enforce, policyholders, assessments incorporation mutual company. Griffin McCoach, 313 498, 61 1023, 85 1481, decided decline favor beneficiaries insurable interest law. Order Commercial Travelers Wolfe, 331 586, 67 1355, 91 1687, seems clear, represent radical departure earlier cases. Wolfe required allowing fraternal benefit society limit duration liability. merely bit rhetoric caution imposing 'state vassalage.' Hawkins Barney's Lessee, Pet. 457, 467, 190, quoted supra, at page 627, 1374, dissenting consideration autonomy sufficient overcome advantages obtained degree 11 involving workmen's compensation, there pre-existing employer employee makes result desirable. possible protecting workman, reluctant impose rules. Bradford Electric Light Clapper, 286 145, 571, 76 1026, suit Hampshire Hampshire. held, sitting would dismiss because compensation exclusive remedy Vermont, where employment made, carried on, domiciled Stone concurred apply Vermont principles comity. He thought 'should leaving free, circumstances now presented, either refuse accordance interpretation law.' pages 164—165, 577—578, 1026. 12 Alaska Packers Ass'n Industrial Acc. Commission, 532, 518, 1044, California into—was free terms Alaska, purported persons there. Pacific Employers Accident 306 493, 59 83 940, need provisions Massachusetts usual employment. 13 Stone, wrote opinions latter specifically limited Clapper decision: 'The than applicable he course temporarily will when obnoxious policy.' 504, 634, 940. 14 tort before us, little vassalage' forum. rest plaintiff defendant. There consequently fixed rules enable parties, time they enter into transaction, predict consequences. 15 case, stressed opened action, refused substantive defense. Indeed, indicated based States: 'It true clause conferred room some play policies. suing denied relief fails provide controversy, see Chambers Baltimore Ohio R. 207 142, 148, 149, 34 (35, 36), 143; compare Douglas York, N.H. H.R. 279 377, 49 355, 73 747 *. may, occasion, doing, denies remedy, unimpaired plaintiff's right, elsewhere.' 160, 576, 16 certainly deny follow reasonable basis decision open them satisfy everyone's notion wise policy. See Loucks Standard Oil 1918, N.Y. 99, 120 N.E. 198. neither novel nor without reason. Compare supra. willing grant witnesses acquainted detailed construing it. wish subject out-of-state difficult bring faced alternative applying complex statute—perhaps important issues—or fitting pattern. legislature feel better allow occurred construe exceptional served warrant general courts. various issues beneficiaries, party suit, limitations liability, comparative negligence, measure . Report Special Commission Study Method Assessing Damages Actions Death (Mass.Sen. 430; Dec. 31, 1942) 21 seq.; Note, (1950) Wis.L.Rev. 354, 360, 363. relation injury surviving raised extremely complicated problems, even familiar U. Pa.L.Rev. 68 (1942); Oppenheim, Survival Tort Action Wrongful Death—A Survey Proposal, Tulane L.Rev. 386 (1942). These diversities reasonably suggest judges versed them. Burford Sun 319 315, 63 1098, 87 1424; Alabama Public Service Comm. Southern 341, 762. 17 No claim discriminated citizens thus Constitution. Nor lack deprives due process. Brinkerhoff-Faris Trust Savings Hill, 281 673, 50 451, 74 1107; Missouri Lewis, 101 22, 30, 25 989. argued flouting federal statute. Atlantic Coast Line Burnett, 239 199, 36 75, 76, 60 226. us undercuts purpose Constitution, explicit Tenth Amendment, leave conduct domestic affairs Few dominant concern matters governing administration vital sacrificed literal reading Clause. 18 support, holding make de novo choice underlying believe 'writer's inkhorn' separate wrong. 'Prima facie entitled statutes, lawfully enacted. One challenges force clause, assumes burden showing, rational basis, those superior forum.' 547—548, 523—524, 1044. decedent, plaintiff, apparent—and none vouchsafed Court—why great defiance 19 Finally, noted proviso 'no prosecuted exists process place.' concedes 'jurisdiction service'. 1/2, 23. converse bar—if Illinois—the suit. 'more Roman Romans.'1 section contains language typically concludes 'provided, state.' 257 Wis. 35, 42 N.W.2d 452. parties concede, must, same previously reduced judgment, 638. E.g., 644, 593, 1100; Elec. 154—155, 573—574, 1026; Ins. 183, 132, 106. 642—643, 592—593, 260—261, 419—420, 749; 372, Angel Bullington, 330 188, 657, 660, 832. reliance O.R. 34, 143, misplaced. consistently exclude causes for, pointed out 642, n. 3, 592, clause.' 211, 246—247, 152; Ind. 502, 633, 940; 547, 523, See, e.g., 547—550, 523—525, 'altered status several independent sovereignties, ignore others, making integral part single nation *.' 439, 214, 276—277, 233—234, 1687. having entertained appellant's lawsuit, chose instead Illinois' involved. distinguishes enacted.' 524, 1044; also, Williams North Carolina, 317 287, 295—296, 207, 211—212, 279. contain different regard disposition proceeds Such differences, generally unimportant. collected 77 A.L.R. 1311, 1317—1324. note 643, Anglo-American Provision Davis 191 373, 24 92, 48 225, Cf. Tennessee Coal, Iron George, 233 359—360, 587, 588—589, 58 997. certain previous suggested distinction Congress' failure prescribe extra-state accorded acts. Subsequent Judicial Code revised provide: 'Such (of state) taken.' (Italics added.) (1946 ed., Supp. III), 1738. deciding unnecessary rely changes accomplished revision. Freund, Chief Conflict Laws, Harv.L.Rev. 1210, 1220 (1946).

Category: 7