 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Afognak Joint Venture v. Old Harbor Native Corp., Supreme Court No. S-11912, No. 6093,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, January 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In native corporations' claim to recover proportionate share of an Exxon claim from a joint venture, it did not matter when the Exxon claim accrued. If the claim accrued before the corporations withdrew from the venture, the claim was a venture asset subject to distribution; after withdrawal and until partition, the parties were tenants in common.
|
|||||
| Christiansen v. Christiansen, Supreme Court No. S-11789, No. 6094,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, January 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Widow brought suit against decedent's cousin after decedent, who had been drinking on cousin's boat, fell from a dock and drowned. Superior court properly rejected widow's argument because widow failed to show that a characteristic feature of maritime law would be materially prejudiced by applying Alaska Stat. § 04.21.020.
|
|||||
| Hartman v. State, Supreme Court No. S-11823, No. 6092,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, January 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Driver's license revocation hearing officer erred by failing to inform the driver, who was proceeding pro se, of the correct procedures for obtaining the central piece of evidence in the case, a tape recording of the stop and arrest. The driver had requested a continuance on ground that he had been unable to gather all of the evidence he needed.
|
|||||
| Moberg v. Municipality of Anchorage, Court of Appeals No. A-9390, No. 2082,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, January 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In DUI matter, defendant's claim that Alaska Admin. Code tit. 13, § 63.110 obliged a hospital to retain a sample of blood until after charging and because hospital failed to comply with this purported duty, test was inadmissible was rejected because test was not performed by government, so Alaska Admin. Code tit. 13, § 63.110 was inapplicable.
|
|||||
| Pruitt v. City of Seward, Supreme Court No. S-11628, No. 6096,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, January 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In zoning dispute, exhaustion of remedies doctrine did not preclude property owner from defending action because city failed to provide property owner with notice that interpretation of Seward, Alaska, City Code § 15.10.140 was final action. Also, property owner should have been given opportunity to submit issue to planning and zoning commission.
|
|||||
| Walker v. Walker, Supreme Court No. S-11526, No. 6095,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, January 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The award of almost 60 percent of the marital estate to the wife in a divorce action was improper because there was a lack of findings to support unequal property division. A remand was appropriate for the superior court to consider the Merrill factors codified in Alaska Stat. § 25.24.160.
|
|||||
| Woodbury v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9402, No. 2081,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, January 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Any Blakely error was harmless by finding of aggravator under Alaska Stat. § 12.55.155(c)(20) based on defendant's stipulation because underlying facts were not in dispute given that defendant did not dispute that he was on felony parole at time of DUI offense so that five-year sentence could be lawfully imposed under Alaska Stat. § 12.55.125(e).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
