Meeting the words of Georgia’s long-arm statute is not enough on its own. The United States Constitution imposes a second requirement.
What Due Process Requires
In Smith v. Smith, 254 Ga. 450 (1985), the Georgia Supreme Court applied the federal standard to the domestic relations long-arm statute. Due process requires that a defendant who “be not present within the territory of the forum” have “certain minimum contacts with it such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend ‘traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.’” The practical question is whether the out-of-state spouse could “reasonably anticipate being haled into court” in Georgia.
Each spouse’s contacts are looked at separately, and Marbury v. Marbury, 256 Ga. 651 (1987), holds that “[t]he applicability of long arm jurisdiction must be assessed on a case by case basis.” There is no fixed number of visits or years that settles it.
A Spouse Can Fit the Statute and Still Win
Marbury is the clearest example. The couple married at Fort Benning in 1970 and left Georgia in 1971. They lived in Tennessee and separated there in 1977. The wife moved back to Georgia and filed for divorce, and the trial court granted her custody, alimony, and child support.
The husband had once resided in Georgia, so the long-arm statute reached him by its terms. The Supreme Court still reversed. He had not lived here in fourteen years, and “there is no indication that this activity on the part of Mr. Marbury had any connection with the subject matter of the present litigation, the dissolution of the marriage.” The exercise of personal jurisdiction over him “was unconstitutional.”
So if you are the spouse still in Georgia, your case turns on what your spouse actually did here and whether the divorce grows out of it.
Contact Us
This post is a quick overview of the law and is not intended as legal advice. Please feel free to contact our office for a consultation if you have questions about this or any other legal aspects regarding your case!