Legal Document

501 U.S. 1 111 S.Ct. 2105 115 L.Ed.2d CONNECTICUT and John F. Digiovanni, Petitioners,v.Brian K. DOEHR. No. 90-143. Argued Jan. 7, 1991. Decided June 6, Syllabus A Connecticut statute authorizes a judge to allow the prejudgment attachment of real estate without prior notice or hearing upon plaintiff's verification that there is probable cause sustain validity his her claim. Petitioner DiGiovanni applied State Superior Court for such an on respondent Doehr's home in conjunction with civil action assault battery he was seeking institute against Doehr same court. The application supported by affidavit which DiGiovanni, five one-sentence paragraphs, stated facts set forth previously submitted complaint were true; declared resulted particular injuries requiring expenditures medical care; "opinion" foregoing sufficient establish cause. On strength these submissions, found ordered attachment. Only after sheriff attached property did receive attachment, informed him right postattachment hearing. Rather than pursue this option, filed suit Federal District Court, claiming violated Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment. That court upheld statute, but Appeals reversed, concluding due process because, inter alia, it permitted ex parte absent showing extraordinary circumstances, see, e.g., Mitchell v. W.T. Grant Co., 416 600, 94 1895, 40 406, nature issues at stake case increased risk wrongfully granted, since fact-specific event fist fight question are complicated matters do not easily lend themselves documentary proof, see id., 609-610, S.Ct., 1901. Held: judgment affirmed. 898 F.2d 852 (CA 2 1990), Justice WHITE delivered opinion respect Parts I, II, III, that: 1. Determining what must be afforded state enabling individual enlist State's aid deprive another means similar procedure requires (1) consideration private interest will affected measure; (2) examination erroneous deprivation through procedures under attack value additional alternative safeguards; (3) principal attention party remedy, regard any ancillary government may have providing forgoing added burden greater protections. Cf. Mathews Eldridge, 424 319, 335, 96 893, 903, 47 18. Pp. 9-11. 2. Application factors demonstrates as case, violates authorizing 11-18. 3 (a) interests significant owner like Doehr, ordinarily clouds title; impairs ability sell otherwise alienate property; taints credit rating; reduces chance obtaining equity loan mortgage; can even place existing mortgage technical default where insecurity clause. effects amount complete, physical, permanent irrelevant, temporary partial impairments rights encumbrances entail merit protection. See, Peralta Heights Medical Center, Inc., 485 80, 85, 108 896, 899, 99 75. 11-12. 4 (b) Without preattachment hearing, permits here too great satisfy interpretations statutory "probable cause" requirement offered parties. If merely demands inquiry into sufficiency complaint, or, still less, good-faith belief sufficient, could authorize defendant's when claim would fail convince jury, rested factual allegations defendant dispute, standard, failed relief granted. Even if provision finding believe rendered favor, reviewing make no realistic assessment based one-sided, self-serving, conclusory particularly issue does concern uncomplicated existence debt delinquent payments proof. See Mitchell, supra, U.S., 609, Moreover, safeguards afford—an "expeditious" adversary judicial review adverse decision, double damages original commenced cause—do adequately reduce none diminished need predeprivation case—that plaintiff had vendor's lien protect, likelihood recovery involved uncomplicated, documentable matters, required post bond—is present here. Although later might negate presence cause, cure earlier prevented. 12-15. 5 (c) favor DiGiovanni's interests, minimal justify burdening ownership determine recovery. sought only ensure availability assets prevailed merits action, about transfer encumber take other during pendency render unavailable judgment. Absent allegations, exigent circumstance permitting postponement until effected. substantive protecting de minimis cannot more weighty those themselves, seriously plead financial administrative burdens involving hearings already claims provide immediate post-deprivation P. 16. 6 3. Historical contemporary practice support analysis. Attachment measures both England country traditionally several limitations reduced deprivation, including requirements taken threatened some satisfaction potential award jeopardy, creditor, opposed victim tort, bond. survey current provisions reveals nearly every either circumstance, both, before place. States most part longer confine attachments creditor claims, development increases importance limitations. 16-18. 7 WHITE, J., unanimous I Part REHNQUIST, C.J., MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, STEVENS, O'CONNOR, KENNEDY, SOUTER, JJ., joined, IV V, joined. concurring opinion, SCALIA, 8 Henry S. Cohn, Hartford, Conn., petitioners. 9 Joanne Faulkner, New Haven, respondent. 10 III Court.** 11 This us whether person bond, satisfies We hold that, not. 12 * March 15, 1988, $75,000 Brian Meridan, Connecticut. took step involve nor pre-existing property. 13 law affording opportunity whose subject remedy provides, relevant part: 14 "The issued attorney provided sections 52-278c 52-278d oath competent affiant, requested . ." Conn.Gen.Stat. § 52-278e (1991).1 15 require bond insure payment suffer should prove unsuccessful. 16 As required, application. In "I willfully, wantonly maliciously assaulted defendant, Doehr"; "[s]aid broke my left wrist further caused ecchymosis eye, well injuries"; expended sums money care treatment." concluded statement, "In show plaintiff." 17 submissions judge, order dated 17, claim" "to $75,000." four days later, 21. He also yet served necessary commence Young Margiotta, 136 Conn. 429, 433, 71 A.2d 924, 926 (1950). hearing: existed claim; request vacated, modified, substituted; portion exempt from execution. 52-278e(b) (1991). 18 options, 52-278e(a)(1) unconstitutional Amendment.2 granted summary DiGiovanni. Pinsky Duncan, 716 F.Supp. 58 (Conn.1989). appeal, divided panel United Second Circuit reversed. (1990).3 Judge Pratt, who wrote court, circumstances. rule derived Sniadach Family Finance Corp. Bay View, 395 337, 89 1820, 23 349 (1969) its progeny, therefore, generally acceptable files officer supervises process, postponed exceptional circumstances delay, present." Id., 855. conclusion deemed consistent our decision 406 (1974), because absence approved 19 reason invalidate ruled, highly case. "uncomplicated len[t] proof" "[t]he minimize[d] writ [would] judge." Similarly, 343-344, 907, (1976), evidentiary termination disability benefits, determination "sharply focused documented." Pratt observed contrast assault. doubted reliably presented version altercation. "Because wrongful considerable we conclude dispensing process." F.2d, 856. went view, constitutionally infirm failure protection ultimately been improvident. 20 Mahoney attaching actions, unconstitutional. disagreed Pratt's required. Newman dissented holding and, Mahoney, necessity 21 dissent's accorded views Supreme Fermont Division, Dynamics America Smith, 178 393, 423 80 (1979). certiorari resolve conflict authority. 498 ----, 42, 112 (1990). II 22 With return procedure. Our cases reflect numerous variations type entail. (1969), struck down Wisconsin effect garnishment wages wage earner. Fuentes Shevin, 407 67, 92 1983, 32 556 (1972), likewise violation replevin vendors goods seized clerk posting Conversely, Louisiana allowing lienholder disputed sequestered (1974). however, carefully noted decided "a legal background sufficiently different invalidation sequestration statute." 615, 1904. Those differences included Louisiana's postdeprivation along option damages; rather clear entitlement writ; detailed affidavit; emphasis lien-holder's preventing waste alienation encumbered 615-618, 1904-1905. North Georgia Finishing, Inc. Di-Chem, 419 601, 95 719, 42 751 (1975), again invalidated setting out claim, neutral magistrate, prompt 606-608, 722-723. These "underscore truism '[d]ue unlike rules, conception fixed content unrelated time, circumstances.' " 334, 902 (quoting Cafeteria Workers McElroy, 367 886, 895, 81 1743, 1748, 1230 (1961)). Mathews, drew decisions itself seeks own initiative. 902. analysis now familiar threefold "the official action"; used, value, any, substitute safeguards"; lastly Government's interest, function fiscal procedural entail." 903. 24 Here focus different. Prejudgment statutes apply disputes between parties government. Such enactments designed enable one "make use overt, assistance officials," they undoubtedly "substantial enough implicate Clause." Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Pope, 478, 486, 1340, 1345, 565 (1988). Nonetheless, increasing entails primarily affects government, control other's 99-101, 2003-2005 (WHITE, dissenting). For requires, first, second, third, with, nonetheless, 25 consider determining adequacy us, first then relation 26 agree significant. Nor deny consequences occurs. 27 Instead, correctly points their impact less perhaps total household wages. Sniadach, 340, 1822; 613, 1903. But has never held extreme deprivations trigger concern. Buchanan Warley, 245 60, 74, 38 16, 18, 62 L.Ed. 149 (1917). To contrary, attachments, liens, doubt, creating enforcing "are strictures 75 (1988) (citing 604, 1898; Hodge Muscatine County, 196 276, 281, 237, 239, 49 477 (1905)).4 28 substantial. By definition, premise ultimate contingency—the able satisfy. Ownbey Morgan, 256 94, 104-105, 41 435-436, 65 837 (1921); R. Thompson & J. Sebert, Remedies: Damages, Equity Restitution 5.01 (1983). judgment, mandates made inqury asks "there claim." 52-278e(a). elsewhere defines terms "that matter 52-278c(a)(2) (1991); Ledgebrook Condominium Assn. Lusk Corp., 172 577, 584, 376 63-64 (1977). What context, remains obscure. initially position, dissent below, objective suit's success. Brief 12; Pinsky, 861-862 (Newman, citing ambiguous cases, reads demonstrate subjective good faith succeed. Respondent 25-26. Assn., A.2d, 63-64; Anderson Nedovich, Conn.App. 88, 561 948, 949 (1989). At oral argument, shifted position argue something akin stating survive motion dismiss. 29 confusion presents interpretations. permit determinations. neither deprivation. Permitting believes liable, facially valid mere unwarranted situations self-evident countervailing consideration. 30 demonstrate, find, plaintiff, error substantial record shows, concedes, skeletal filed. urges normally reviews well, concedes conclusory. It concerning action's success submissions. And said, alleged assault, give confrontation. Unlike payments, "ordinarily proof." results illustrates "fairness rarely obtained secret, one-sided decisive rights. [And n]o better instrument devised arriving truth jeopardy serious loss meet it." Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee McGrath, 341 123, 170-172, 624, 647-649, 817 (1951) (Frankfurter, concurring). 31 afford risk. provides "expeditiou[s]" 52-278e(c);5 52-278e(b); 52-278l (a); 52-568(a)(1). Similar considerations despite lack lent 1901, put up None diminishing true Amendment draws bright lines around three-day, 10-day 50-day Any taking within purview Fuentes, 86, 1997. Finally, supply Plaintiff His action. Yet allegation recognized properly postponing 1901; 90-92, 1999-2000; 339, 1821. 33 No themselves. minimis. §§ Fermont, 397-398, 83. 34 unknown common law. "it traces origin Custom London, attach hands custody third person, proceedings mayor's sheriff's court." Ownbey, 104, 435. Generally speaking, permits. usually authorized jeopardy. C. Drake, Law Suits Attachments, 40-82 (1866) (hereinafter Drake); Shinn, Garnishment 86 (1896) Shinn). moreover, confined creditors. Drake 9-10; Shinn 12. noted, debtors creditors readily accurate assessments merits. Tort here, discuss historically 114-183; 153. 35 Connecticut's appears suspect light practice. (See appendix.) Twenty-seven States, Columbia, present. provided. Ten prewrit unless shown. Six limit compelling condition.6 Three always Washington, Connecticut, Rhode Island purportedly heightened threat interests. certain types cases: so equitable; Washington attached, claims. development, 36 mean imply given exigency protects constitutional attack. suggest surveyed necessarily free problems infirmities general. believe, almost all confirm view failing least clearly falls short process. A. 37 majority reach issue, Justices deem appropriate security addition exigency.7 affect Several severe, homeowner's mortgage. repeatedly utility mistaken remedies. 610, 611, 724, 725 (Powell, judgment); 619, 728 (BLACKMUN, dissenting); 606, n. 8, 1899, 8. 39 time danger deprived unacceptably high requirement. especially apparent assertion discussed how tolerates, permit, impermissible erroneously depriving plaintiff. Until sustained fact nil. supply. Both members play essential role reducing degree precisely circumstance. 1906; 101, 2005 end remain undue adversarial best, court's initial each party's produce educated prediction win. when, makes elusive. consequence, full proper probable-cause standard prevent many defendants having title homes impaired suits result contingency justifies impairment, namely, currently books All handful before, (for vast majority, circumstances) soon after, takes Bonds similarly feature considered, 101-102 1, 435 1; 73, 75-76, 81-82, 1990, 1991-1992, 1994-1995; 1899; 602-603, 608, 721, 723. stresses 52-568(a)(1).8 fails matter, meaning itself. Should term facial insufficient. little obtain nonetheless recover proving fraud malice Problems persist best await assuming 52-568(a)(1) brought counterclaim. Hydro Air Versa Technologies, F.R.D. 111, 113 (Conn.1983). Settlement, law, precludes encourages tactical device pressure opponent capitulate. Blake Levy, 191 257, 464 52 An attorney's advice constitutes complete defense, unsound erroneous. Vandersluis Weil, 176 353, 361, 982, 987 (1978). guarantee adequate appreciable Section facing subjecting carry 604-609, B 43 discussion compels excuses altogether. needed augment protections hearings, arguably follows renders unnecessary. unconvincing, ignores harms bonds undo prevent. rarely, ever, unwarranted. emphasized very least. 606-607, Every one, expressly propriety 44 compensated loses, provable inadequate redress harm inflicted, avoided early held. so, recreate opportunity. applies parent child's education, entrepreneur start business strong rating, simply homeowner face disruption placed default. extent harms, grows length suit. Here, argument indicated commonly seven years completion. (Tr. Oral Arg. 44.) Many anywhere equivalent twice seeks. Utah Rule Civ.Proc. 64C(b). amounts bear disruptions. clear, assumption fundamentally flawed. Reliance account flow excuse timely 45 serve dispense immediately basis few later. reasons same: inflict injury fully redressed determines invalid. 46 Once more, history conclusion. Historically, though invariably addition. 4, 114; Likewise, eight Out exigency, parte. testimony underscores point limitation eliminates allows waiver reconcile accurately, above. V Because provision, 52-278e(a)(1), affirmed, remanded opinion. 48 ordered. APPENDIX TO OPINION OF THE COURT Statutes Preattach Exi- Hrg. Required gent Circs.; Unless Most Bond Postattach Circs. Alabama X 50 Alaska Pre-attachment hrg 51 Arizona Arkansas 53 California 54 Colorado 55 (or estate) 56 Delaware 57 DC Florida 59 60 Hawaii 61 Idaho Illinois 63 Indiana 64 Iowa Kansas 66 Kentucky 67 -- Continued Maine 68 Maryland 69 Massachusetts X/O1 70 Michigan Minnesota 72 Mississippi 73 Missouri 74 Montana Nebraska 76 Nevada 77 Hampshire 78 Jersey X/O 79 Mexico York Carolina 82 Dakota 83 Ohio 84 Oklahoma 85 Oregon Pennsylvania Rescinded 530 1123 (CA3 1976). 87 (but equitable claim) 88 South 90 Tennessee X2 91 Texas 93 Vermont Virginia X3 (except contract 97 98 West 100 Wyoming ion is, correct bases unconstitutionality (1969); (1972); Finishing (1975). inexorably Court's suggests. cited dealt personalty—bank deposits chattels—and physical seizure itself, use. represented revolution jurisprudence limits methods debtor them possession hand, pre-judgment secures incipient 101 therefore breaks new ground, out, emphatically does, today's holding. Spielman-Fond, Hanson's, 379 997, 999 (D.Ariz.1973), filing mechanics' owner. summarily affirmed decision. 417 901, 2596, 208 Other courts read affirmance imposition property, disturb owner's enjoyment calling safeguards. undisturbed possession. "For clause." Ante, p. 11. Given elaborate system records relating prevails states, lienor belonging significantly impair him. 102 was, fn. ante, alternate available unpaid mechanics materialmen contributed labor supplies incorporated improvements posted noticed distinguishes attach. Materialman's mechanic's workers labor, suppliers furnished material, improvement Since material reclaimed once become realty, method workmen small businessmen defaulted promise pay materials. sort contested largely defeat purpose statutes. 103 brief relies Bartlett Williams, 801, 104 46, lis pendens, land pendens post-sequestration established traditional whereby (usually creditor) brings enforce gives parties; causes establishes, successful, relate back date pendens. world being lawsuit creates know pending right. too, class employed Today's law; dealing (1988), (1905), arose foreclosure sales entitled notice. change dramatically reflected compare casual statement Holmes, writing Coffin Brothers Bennett, 277 29, 31, 422, 423, 768 (1928): 105 "[N]othing alleging advance dependent suit." 106 contest liability proceeding. 107 unwise unnecessary, proceed, IV, abstract hypothetical it. which, recognizes, "unlike 7. states create areas dicta damage, titles write opinions often enjoy luxury distinguishing two elements concerns IV—the "exigent circumstances"—prove vague particulary useful. knows conditions be, "bond" little. secured unaddressed—is unsuccessful underlying lawsuit, instead conditioned test? circumstances" referred admittedly equally vague; non-residency attempt conceal others, effort flee jurisdiction others. concrete questions decide prerequisites lawful 109 110 manner cf. Pacific Mutual Life Ins. Co. Haslip, 499 1032, (1991) (SCALIA, judgment), determined applying test (1976); test. join concur Court. ** CHIEF JUSTICE, SOUTER SCALIA joins III. text reads: "Allowance Notice defendant. Subsequent order. municipal officers. reasonable (A) resides maintains office over (B) hidden hide himself (C) remove (D) fraudulently dispose disposed intent hinder, delay defraud (E) withheld money, liable debts (F) insolvent unable mature. "(b) pursuant section, shall include following prepared plaintiff: YOU HAVE RIGHTS SPECIFIED IN GENERAL STATUTES, INCLUDING CHAPTER 903a, WHICH MAY WISH EXERCISE CONCERNING THIS PREJUDGMENT REMEDY. THESE INCLUDE: RIGHT HEARING OBJECT REMEDY FOR LACK PROBABLE CAUSE SUSTAIN CLAIM; REQUEST THAT BE MODIFIED, VACATED OR DISMISSED BOND SUBSTITUTED; AND AS ANY PORTION PROPERTY ATTACHED CLAIM IS EXEMPT FROM EXECUTION. "(c) appearing move dissolve modify section proceed hear expeditiously. effect. dissolved. taken." plaintiffs joined challenging separate instances defendants. participate invited intervene U.S.C. 2403(b) argument. elected participated Hanson's control. interest. (Ariz.1973) (three-judge court) (per curiam ). disposition precedential argued written Edelman Jordan, 415 651, 671, 1347, 1359, 662 Spielman-Fond event. issue. F.Supp., 997. explain ground upholding suspect. Infra, ----. vigorously dispute contends rules motion—including mandated hearing—until service. Practice Book 114 Under elapse service date. 52-46 counters request. (1979) ("Most important, affords postseizure dissolved moving proves claim"). assume, deciding, prompt. assumption, stake. One State, Pennsylvania, Jonnet Dollar Savings Bank City, Ordinarily address contention advanced enlarge cross-petition certiorari. E.g., Trans World Airlines, Thurston, 469 119, 14, 620, 523 (1985). rejected mandate involves past prompted highlighted respondent." Berkemer McCarty, 468 420, 23, 3138, 3148, 317 (1984). First, shown, intertwined fairly considered facets general Thus, "[w]ithout strain, characterized below" insofar divorced Ibid. Second, aspect "plainly warrants attention, lower guidance." Third, "and importantly, briefed question." provides: "Any commences prosecutes another, name, name asserts defense prosecuted damages, malicious unjustly vex trouble treble damages." "X/O" "Bond Required" column indicates discretion may, quash except who, diligent efforts, served. Chief REHNQUIST whom BLACKMUN joins, concurring. "as case," ante Unfortunately, remainder enters lengthy disquisition combination IV. creditor's tort battery; pre-deprivation hearing; contains circumstances," assets; plaintiff; opin-

Classification Label: 1