 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Butts v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-7678, No. 1821,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 23, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A court did not err, in defendant's robbery case, by denying his motion to dismiss where defendant grabbed the victim's purse and tugged until she fell down because that conduct constituted bodily impact under the statute.
|
|||||
| Fenner v. Municipality of Anchorage, Supreme Court No. S-10064, No. 5610,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, August 23, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An employee's claim for damages was barred by the workers' compensation exclusive remedy provision because his claim that the municipality committed an intentional tort, an exception to the exclusive remedy provision, was not valid.
|
|||||
| Hinsberger v. State, Supreme Court No. S-10130, No. 5609,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, August 23, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The patient failed to show, for his claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress, that the State had a preexisting duty to him that it breached. The State had not breached its duty to provide necessary medical services.
|
|||||
| Matanuska Elec. Ass'n v. Chugach Elec. Ass'n, Supreme Court No. S-9839, No. 5611,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, August 23, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A ruling of the Regulatory Commission of Alaska compelling an electric utility, to refund payments collected as a result of a miscalculation in the cost of generation and transmission line loss constituted impermissible retroactive ratemaking.
|
|||||
| Prentzel v. Dep't of Public Safety, Supreme Court No. S-9979, No. 5615,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, August 23, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The superior court erred in dismissing the citizen's negligence and other claims against the State and individual troopers as the pleadings alone were insufficient for the appellate court to decide the resulting issues.
|
|||||
| State v. Boceski, Court of Appeals No. A-7894, No. 1819,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 23, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The police officer's surreptitious eavesdropping of defendant's drug transaction did not violate defendant's constitutional right to privacy as the officer was lawfully present in the home and defendant ran the risk that someone might overhear.
|
|||||
| State v. Eskridge, Court of Appeals No. A-8228, No. 1820,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 23, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Probationary sentence of less than 90 days in jail for a first time offender who pleaded no contest to selling ecstacy to undercover police officer and who was good candidate for rehabilitation was not too lenient under sentencing guidelines.
|
|||||
| Van Deusen v. Seavey, Supreme Court Nos. S-9978/10057, No. 5613,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, August 23, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Collateral estoppel barred property owners' second attempt to enjoin alleged private nuisance caused by tour operators' sled dogs; owners did not demonstrate there was any genuine factual dispute about whether noise the dogs caused had worsened.
|
|||||
| Whah v. Whah, Supreme Court No. S-10171, No. 5612,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, August 23, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because it was unclear why a trial court denied an ex-wife's motion for an order finding that the ex-husband waived his right to a child support credit for certain insurance benefit payments, the matter was remanded.
|
|||||
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. |
