 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Chenega Corp. v. Exxon Corp., Supreme Court Nos. S-7252, S-7512, No. 5211,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, November 22, 1999, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The jury instructions that native corporations could not assert the federal government's claims for lost use of selected but unconveyed lands damaged by oil spill were erroneous; allowing set-off from a liability fund was not error.
|
|||||
| Kodiak Island Borough v. Exxon Corp., Supreme Court No. S-7581, No. 5210,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, November 22, 1999, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant cities were entitled to claim damages for diverting services to clean up an oil spill from appellees' vessel where federal maritime law did not preempt Alaska's strict liability hazardous substances statutes.
|
|||||
| Hanson v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-6824, No. 4152,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, November 24, 1999, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court's denial of defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment was not an abuse of discretion; the State was not obliged to instruct the grand jury on a defendant's possible defense.
|
|||||
| Bohanan v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-6907, No. 1656,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, November 26, 1999, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sexual assault conviction affirmed; execution of a Glass warrant does not raise the same policy concerns as execution of the usual search warrant, because Glass warrants do not involve a person's right to physical privacy.
|
|||||
| Moore v. Department of Natural Resources, Supreme Court No. S-8624, No. 5209,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, November 26, 1999, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Company's mining rights on state-selected, but not yet approved, federal lands were nullified because company was not qualified to conduct business in the state.
|
|||||
| Willis v. Dep't of Revenue, Child Support Enforcement Div., Supreme Court No. S-8367, No. 5208,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, November 26, 1999, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Case was remanded, because decision requiring payment of child support arrears and ongoing monthly payments failed to explain denial of request to reduce child support debt by applying financial hardship exemption.
|
|||||
| Osborne v. Buckman, Supreme Court No. S-8466, No. 5213,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, December 3, 1999, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because bankruptcy stay tolled the statute of limitations, the appellants' judicial foreclosure suit was timely. Grant of summary judgment in favor of appellees reversed.
|
|||||
| Smith v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-4054, No. 1657,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, December 3, 1999, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence illegally obtained from a defendant's home that would have been discovered through predictable investigative processes was not suppressed under the inevitable discovery exception to the exclusionary rule.
|
|||||
| State ex rel. Husa, Supreme Court No. S-8370, No. 5212,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, December 3, 1999, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The order reducing some of the husband's child support was reversed because an agreement to reduce the support obligation did not meet strict procedural requirements and retroactive modification of child support obligation was prohibited.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
