 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Braun v. Borough, Supreme Court Nos. S-12050, S-12359, No. 6305,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, September 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a voter, as a public interest litigant, was successful in a challenge of the constitutionality of a borough reapportionment plan because it had a variance over the 10 percent prima facie constitutional limit, the voter should have been awarded attorney's fees and costs, pursuant to Alaska R. Civ. Proc. 82(b)(2), under a catalyst theory.
|
|||||
| Eniero v. Brekke, Supreme Court No. S-12873, No. 6306,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, September 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the parties' had joint legal and physical custody of their daughter, the superior court did not abuse its discretion by ruling that it was in the daughter's best interests under Alaska Stat. § 25.24.150(c) to stay with the father in Alaska to maintain continuity and stability should the mother move to Oregon.
|
|||||
| Littleton v. Banks, Supreme Court No. S-12508, No. 6304,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, September 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court properly modified child custody under Alaska Stat. 25.24.150 to a father because the mother lived in four residences in five years, she worked for six employers in five years, she admitted that after ending substance abuse treatment she was drinking more, and the father's purchase of a business supported his intention to establish roots.
|
|||||
| Whiting v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-10035, No. 2183,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, September 12, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred when it found that defendant who was convicted of fourth-degree controlled substance misconduct, in violation of Alaska Stat. § 11.71.040(a)(3)(A), was not eligible for reduction of his sentence pursuant to Alaska Stat. § 12.55.155(d)(15) because two oxycodone pills authorities seized were found in a car, and not in his home.
|
|||||
| Swetzof v. Philemonoff, Supreme Court No. S-13165, Order No. 63,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, September 15, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: City clerk correctly refused to certify a proposed initiative or application for petition, which would prohibit the city from engaging in the sale or delivery of electric power to retail customers. The application for petition failed the enforceable as a matter of law requirement of Alaska Stat. § 29.26.110(a)(4).
|
|||||
| Harmon v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9513, No. 2184,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, September 19, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to change venue in a murder and sexual assault trial that received extensive pre-trial publicity because the judge properly assessed the credibility of the prospective jurors and the court found no substantial reason to doubt the impartiality of the chosen jurors.
|
|||||
| In re McGregory, Supreme Court No. S-12597, No. 6307,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, September 19, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case in which an elderly woman and her daughter successfully opposed the State's petition for guardianship, the superior court properly declined to award attorney fees to the woman and her daughter. The superior court's finding that the petition was not malicious, frivolous, or without just cause was not clearly erroneous.
|
|||||
| Vanek v. State, Supreme Court No. S-12579, No. 6308,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, September 19, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Commercial salmon fishers failed to state a takings claim based on regulations that reduced the amount of fish that they were able to catch and thus reduced the value of their entry permits because an entry permit was not compensable property for purposes of the takings clauses of the Fifth Amendment and the Alaska Constitution.
|
|||||
| Ellison v. Ellison, Supreme Court No. S-12899, No. 1313,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, September 24, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Father's motion for a custody modification under Alaska Stat. § 25.20.110(a) was denied without hearing because he was unable to show a substantial change in circumstances based on bare allegations that the mother was unable to meet the children's needs; more specific allegations raised for the first time in a reply memorandum were not considered.
|
|||||
| Kelley v. Matanuska Elec. Ass'n, Supreme Court No. S-12488, No. 1312,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, September 24, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where title to the subject property was conveyed to the landowner without warranty by a tax foreclosure sale deed, the superior court did not err by granting summary judgment for the electric company in the landowner's action to quiet title under Alaska Stat. § 09.45.010; the landowner's fee simple title was subject to a utility easement.
|
|||||
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. |
