In MacDowall v. MMG Ins. Co., (2007 ME 56), a pedestrian who obtained a money judgment against a tortfeasor regarding personal injuries that were sustained when the pedestrian was struck by a car driven by the tortfeasor, brought a reach-and-apply action against the tortfeasor's automobile insurer.

The tortfeasor's insurer contended that it did not receive a meaningful opportunity to participate in the underlying tort action and thus did not receive due process in the reach-and-apply action.

The court disagreed and affirmed the judgment of the lower court, determining that the insurer had a meaningful opportunity to defend its interests before judgment was entered against the tortfeasor.

According to the court, in the context of a statute governing reach-and-apply action against a judgment debtor's liability insurer, due process seeks to ensure that an opportunity to defend the insurer's interests before judgment was entered against the debtor was afforded to the insurer. In addition, courts evaluate only the opportunity available at the time the insurer received notice to determine whether that opportunity was sufficiently meaningful to satisfy due process.

In addition, the court stated, whether the insurer had a good excuse was not relevant, and judgment was based solely on whether the insurer received due process. According to the court, it makes that determination by examining the opportunities afforded to the insurer. Because the insurer had the opportunity to remove the default and also had the opportunity to contest damages, those opportunities satisfied due process.