## Facts

- Sarah M. Wyman, a Florida resident, and Edgar L. Newhouse, Jr., a New York resident, had a long personal relationship; Newhouse had never lived in Florida.
- While Newhouse was traveling, Wyman sent a telegram urging him to come to Florida, followed by letters and a phone call stating that her mother was dying abroad, that Wyman was leaving the United States permanently, and that she needed to see him to discuss her affairs.
- Wyman also communicated about arrangements for their stay in Miami, reinforcing the request that Newhouse travel to Florida.
- When Newhouse arrived at the Miami airport, Wyman was present with a deputy sheriff, and Newhouse was immediately served with Florida process in a civil action.
- Newhouse promptly left Florida and did not appear in the Florida action; a Florida court entered a default judgment against him after damages were assessed.
- Wyman then sued in federal court in New York to enforce the Florida judgment; Newhouse defended on the ground that he had been fraudulently lured into Florida solely to permit service of process.

## Issues

1. Whether a sister-state judgment is enforceable when personal jurisdiction was obtained by fraudulently inducing a nonresident defendant to enter the forum for the purpose of service.
2. Whether such a judgment may be collaterally attacked for lack of personal jurisdiction when enforcement is sought in another state.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of the New York enforcement action.
- The court held that the Florida court’s personal jurisdiction was procured by fraud directed at bringing Newhouse into the state for service.
- Because the fraud went to jurisdiction, the Florida judgment was void and not entitled to enforcement in another state.
- Newhouse was permitted to raise the jurisdictional fraud as a defense in the enforcement action rather than being required to return to Florida to set aside the judgment.

## Legal Principles

- Personal service obtained by fraudulently inducing a defendant to enter the forum solely to effect service is ineffective to establish personal jurisdiction.
- Fraud that goes to the court’s acquisition of jurisdiction over the person renders the resulting judgment void, not merely voidable.
- A void sister-state judgment is not entitled to full faith and credit and may be collaterally attacked when enforcement is sought elsewhere.
- A defendant may assert lack of personal jurisdiction based on jurisdictional fraud as an equitable defense in an action on the judgment.

## Conclusion

A judgment entered after in-state service achieved by deliberate deception to lure a nonresident into the forum solely for service is void for want of personal jurisdiction and may be denied enforcement in a later action on the judgment in another state.


Wyman v. Newhouse, 93 F.2d 313 (2d Cir. 1937)