Carlson v. Bos

Although I agree with the result reached by the majority, I do not agree with the majority’s view of Graham v. Sawaya, 632 P.2d 851 (Utah 1981). The majority states that Graham held:

[Tjhe form of notice required by the federal constitution [depends] on whether the action is labeled in rem or in person-am. This also leads us to reject Graham ’s conclusion that substitute service accompanied by mailed notice sent to a last known address can never satisfy the requirements of due process, as those requirements are explained in Mullane.

Graham did not base the form of notice required on whether the…