Connecticut v. Doehr, 501 U.S. 1 (1991), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a state statute authorizing prejudgment attachment of a defendant's real property upon the filing of an action without prior notice or hearing, a showing of extraordinary circumstances, or a requirement that the plaintiff post a bond violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Under the Connecticut procedure, attachments were based solely on the plaintiff's submitting a "verification" (equivalent to an affidavit) asserting of probable cause to sustain the validity of his or her claim.

DiGiovanni moved for Doehr's real property to be attached, submitting a five-sentence affidavit opining that there was a good basis for his claim.

The Court concluded that the constitutionality of the Connecticut prejudgment attachment procedure must be judged by the balancing test for due process claims described in Mathews v. Eldridge (1976).

The Court concluded that the Connecticut law created too great a risk of erroneous deprivation of property to survive scrutiny under Mathews.