 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Artemie v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9286, No. 2104,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of defendant's motion for dismissal of his criminal case with prejudice was proper because the judge could have concluded that there was manifest necessity for a mistrial because there was no probability the jury would reach a unanimous verdict. Thus, retrial was not barred under the Double Jeopardy Clause, U.S. Const. amend. V.
|
|||||
| Ayres v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, Supreme Court No. S-12018, No. 6127,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A superior court properly held that Alaska Stat. § 21.89.020 (2001) did not require a written waiver when an insured person selected uninsured/underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage with limits below the liability coverage voluntarily selected, so long as the UIM limits met the statutory minimums set out in Alaska Stat. §§ 28.20.440 and 28.22.101.
|
|||||
| Heustess v. Kelley-Heustess, Supreme Court No. S-12126, No. 6126,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A divorce court erred when it valued a house at the time the parties separated because that valuation deprived the husband of the appreciation in value of the house, and the trial court violated the husband's due process rights by awarding the wife premarital child support when the husband was not given notice of the issue before final arguments.
|
|||||
| Hicks v. Pleasants, Supreme Court No. S-12110, No. 6128,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although trial court had jurisdiction over property distribution after husband defaulted in divorce proceedings because the prayer for relief was sufficient to put husband on notice that the wife sought property distribution, the distribution order was vacated because the trial court applied the incorrect standard.
|
|||||
| Hodges v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9610, No. 2103,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, May 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In assessing total amount of restitution under Alaska Stat. § 12.55.045 without regard to defendant's ability to pay did not deprive him of due process of law, Alaska Const. art. I, § 7, nor did it defeat the sentencing goal of reformation, Alaska Const. art. I, § 12, so long as judge considered his ability to pay when setting method of repayment.
|
|||||
| Allstate Ins. Co. v. Falgoust, Supreme Court No. S-12090, No. 6129,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, June 1, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A household exclusion in a homeowners' policy applied to the claims of two foster children, who alleged that they suffered injuries at the hands of two insureds, because they were dependents of the insureds and were residents of the household.
|
|||||
| Ware v. Ware, Supreme Court No. S-11687, No. 6130,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, June 1, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In dispute between siblings over a family's homestead, trial court properly awarded brother summary judgment in suit initiated by sister because sister failed to show evidentiary support for claim of undue influence when mother conveyed entire homestead to brother. Award of attorney's fees to brother was proper under Alaska R. Civ. P. 82(b)(2).
|
|||||
| Eskridge v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9506, No. 5225,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, June 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was convicted of attempted first-degree assault on a police officer, Alaska R. Evid. 404(b) did not prohibit the admission of evidence that he was trying to force his way inside a home and left when the complainant called 911. The evidence was relevant to show defendant's state of mind and intent to avoid contact with the police.
|
|||||
| State v. Beltz, Court of Appeals No. A-9496, No. 2105,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, June 8, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under both the Fourth Amendment and Alaska Const. art. I, § 14, defendant's action of placing his trash in plain view at the end of his driveway where it was left for routine collection and could easily have been scavenged or accidently removed, showed that he did not harbor a reasonable expectation of privacy.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
