 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Gregorio v. Gregorio, Supreme Court Nos. S-10850/S-11139, No. 1221,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, July 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court's grant of wife's writ of execution was premature as the requisite finding of just and sufficient reasons for wife's delay in obtaining a writ as required by Alaska Stat. § 09.35.020 was omitted, and pleadings raised material issues of fact as to whether the original judgment had been satisfied and, if not, how much remained due.
|
|||||
| W.C. v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8843, No. 4997,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, July 27, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the record supported a finding that a juvenile aided and abetted other vandals, the trial court's restitution order holding him liable for all of the damages was affirmed under former Alaska Stat. § 12.55.045(f) and the trial court was not obligated to assess his ability to pay restitution where he presented no evidence on the issue.
|
|||||
| Edmonds v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8998, No. 1998,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, July 29, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant received a composite sentence for four counts of sexual assault pursuant to Alaska Stat. § 12.55.025 (repealed 2004); he claimed that the sentence violated his right to a jury trial. Sentence was lawful because appellate court concluded that judge's ability to impose consecutive or concurrent sentences was not altered by recent caselaw.
|
|||||
| Johnson v. Huges Thorsness Powell Huddleston & Bauman LLC (In re Estate of Johnson), Supreme Court No. S-11084, No. 5928,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, July 29, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court erred by approving the final accounting and decree of distribution for an estate because a law firm failed to meet the burden of proving that the fees charged were reasonable under Alaska R. Prof. Conduct 1.5; the billing records were too vague to establish whether the charges were reasonable.
|
|||||
| Lee v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8819, No. 1997,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, July 29, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court held that attorney could not have a professional transcriber conduct word-for-word review of the transcript prepared by attorney's office because it was a violation of Alaska R. App. P. 210(b)(3) and Alaska Admin. R. 36(a) for attorney or one of his employee's to prepare a draft transcript for a professional transcriber.
|
|||||
| Milligrock v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8733, No. 1999,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, July 29, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A sentence for third degree assault did not violate the Sixth Amendment, even though aggravating factors under Alaska Stat. § 12.55.155(c) were not decided by a jury, because two of the factors related to defendant's prior convictions. There was no plain error regarding the third factor since the victim's relationship with defendant was undisputed.
|
|||||
| Wendell C. II v. State, Supreme Court No. S-11601, Supreme Court No. 11604, No. 5929,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, July 29, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Termination of parents' parental rights was affirmed; judge's reliance on studies that were not admitted into evidence was harmless error as parents had long-standing problems with alcohol abuse, children had been in foster care since 2002, and no reasonable likelihood existed that the decision would have been different absent the studies.
|
|||||
| Alyssa B. v. Dep't of Health & Social Servs., Supreme Court No. S-11378, No. 5930,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, August 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As Alaska Const. art. I, § 16 preserved the right to a jury trial only for causes of action that were legal, not equitable in nature, and due process clause, Alaska Const. art. I, § 7, did not require the availability of jury trials in child-in-need-of-aid proceedings, a mother's request for a jury trial was properly denied.
|
|||||
| Swarner v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9281, No. 2002,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 5, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a drug case, extradition was sufficiently supported where an affidavit of probable cause was sworn to before a notary public; because the three methods for supporting an extradition request were specified disjunctively in Alaska Stat. § 12.70.020(a)(2), an affidavit that supported an information did not have to be sworn to before a magistrate.
|
|||||
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. |
