Year In Review

Patterson v. State

Posted on February 22nd, 2015

[CRIMINAL LAW] In Patterson v. State,[1] the court of appeals held that registered sex offenders are required to disclose all email addresses at their annual or quarterly verifications, including those established before the email disclosure requirement went into effect.[2] Patterson, because of multiple convictions, was required to register as a sex offender continuously for life Continue Reading »

State v. Schmidt

Posted on February 22nd, 2015

[CONSTITUTIONAL LAW] In State v. Schmidt,[1] the supreme court held a municipal property tax exemption for senior citizens and disabled veterans that denies the full value of the exemption to same-sex couples violates the state’s equal protection clause.[2] By statute, Alaska grants a $150,000 property tax exemption for a home owned and occupied by a Continue Reading »

Lockwood v. Geico General Insurance Co.

Posted on February 22nd, 2015

[INSURANCE LAW] In Lockwood v. Geico General Insurance Co[1], the supreme court held that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to the reasonableness of the insurer’s delay of payment where the insurer delayed payment due to unsubstantiated doubts of the insured’s medical claims without making any attempt verify those claims.[2] Lockwood sought payment Continue Reading »

Gou-Leonhardt v. State

Posted on February 22nd, 2015

[CRIMINAL PROCEDURE] In Gou-Leonhardt v. State,[1] the Court of Appeals of Alaska held that the superior court could not unilaterally deviate from the terms laid out in a plea agreement even though the defendant completed a rehabilitating court wellness program.[2] After Gou-Leonhardt completed his time in the court-appointed wellness program, the superior court declined Gou-Leonhardt’s Continue Reading »

Patterson v. Cox

Posted on February 21st, 2015

[CIVIL PROCEDURE] In Patterson v. Cox,[1] the supreme court held that the failure to issue an order to show cause or a bench warrant in response to a motion to enforce a subpoena constitutes judicial error.[2] Patterson’s SUV was struck from behind when he braked to avoid a stalled car in his lane.[3] He filed Continue Reading »

Achman v. State

Posted on February 21st, 2015

[TORT LAW] In Achman v. State,[1] the supreme court held that the Department of Corrections (“DOC”) has no heightened duty to take additional steps to prevent an inmate from attempting suicide when that inmates suicidal ideation is not reasonably foreseeable to the DOC.[2] Charles Kemp attempted suicide while in administrative segregation at Anchorage Correctional Complex.[3] Continue Reading »

Conley v. Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc.

Posted on February 21st, 2015

[TORT LAW] In Conly v. Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc.,[1] the supreme court held that a superior court does not abuse its discretion when it allows evidence for permissible purposes that is then used in trial for impermissible purposes if the opposing party fails to object to the use of evidence in that way or Continue Reading »

Pralle v. Milwicz

Posted on February 21st, 2015

[TORT LAW] In Pralle v. Milwicz,[1] the supreme court held it will not overturn a jury verdict when the record shows there is sufficient evidence to support the verdict.[2] The defendant (“Milwicz”) negligently rear-ended the plaintiff (“Pralle”)’s car, after which Pralle filed suit for personal injury.[3] The jury found there was sufficient evidence that, although Continue Reading »

Davis Wright Tremane LLP v. State of Alaska, Dep’t of Administration

Posted on February 21st, 2015

[ADMINISTRATIVE LAW] In Davis Wright Tremane LLP v. State of Alaska, Dep’t of Administration,[1] the supreme court held that administrative agencies have the deferential discretion to forbid consideration bids for contracts submitted after the deadline for proposals.[2] A state agency issued a request for proposals for legal services, and a law firm submitted a proposal Continue Reading »

In re Mark V.

Posted on February 21st, 2015

[CIVIL PROCEDURE] In In re Mark V.,[1] the supreme court held the collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine does not allow appellate review of an involuntary civil commitment when the committee has had several recent civil commitments and there is no evidence of a procedural defect in the commitment hearing.[2] The superior court ordered Continue Reading »

Page 30 of 47« First...1020...2829303132...40...Last »

Year In Review

Patterson v. State

Posted on February 22nd, 2015

[CRIMINAL LAW] In Patterson v. State,[1] the court of appeals held that registered sex offenders are required to disclose all email addresses at their annual or quarterly verifications, including those established before the email disclosure requirement went into effect.[2] Patterson, because of multiple convictions, was required to register as a sex offender continuously for life Continue Reading »

State v. Schmidt

Posted on February 22nd, 2015

[CONSTITUTIONAL LAW] In State v. Schmidt,[1] the supreme court held a municipal property tax exemption for senior citizens and disabled veterans that denies the full value of the exemption to same-sex couples violates the state’s equal protection clause.[2] By statute, Alaska grants a $150,000 property tax exemption for a home owned and occupied by a Continue Reading »

Lockwood v. Geico General Insurance Co.

Posted on February 22nd, 2015

[INSURANCE LAW] In Lockwood v. Geico General Insurance Co[1], the supreme court held that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to the reasonableness of the insurer’s delay of payment where the insurer delayed payment due to unsubstantiated doubts of the insured’s medical claims without making any attempt verify those claims.[2] Lockwood sought payment Continue Reading »

Gou-Leonhardt v. State

Posted on February 22nd, 2015

[CRIMINAL PROCEDURE] In Gou-Leonhardt v. State,[1] the Court of Appeals of Alaska held that the superior court could not unilaterally deviate from the terms laid out in a plea agreement even though the defendant completed a rehabilitating court wellness program.[2] After Gou-Leonhardt completed his time in the court-appointed wellness program, the superior court declined Gou-Leonhardt’s Continue Reading »

Patterson v. Cox

Posted on February 21st, 2015

[CIVIL PROCEDURE] In Patterson v. Cox,[1] the supreme court held that the failure to issue an order to show cause or a bench warrant in response to a motion to enforce a subpoena constitutes judicial error.[2] Patterson’s SUV was struck from behind when he braked to avoid a stalled car in his lane.[3] He filed Continue Reading »

Achman v. State

Posted on February 21st, 2015

[TORT LAW] In Achman v. State,[1] the supreme court held that the Department of Corrections (“DOC”) has no heightened duty to take additional steps to prevent an inmate from attempting suicide when that inmates suicidal ideation is not reasonably foreseeable to the DOC.[2] Charles Kemp attempted suicide while in administrative segregation at Anchorage Correctional Complex.[3] Continue Reading »

Conley v. Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc.

Posted on February 21st, 2015

[TORT LAW] In Conly v. Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc.,[1] the supreme court held that a superior court does not abuse its discretion when it allows evidence for permissible purposes that is then used in trial for impermissible purposes if the opposing party fails to object to the use of evidence in that way or Continue Reading »

Pralle v. Milwicz

Posted on February 21st, 2015

[TORT LAW] In Pralle v. Milwicz,[1] the supreme court held it will not overturn a jury verdict when the record shows there is sufficient evidence to support the verdict.[2] The defendant (“Milwicz”) negligently rear-ended the plaintiff (“Pralle”)’s car, after which Pralle filed suit for personal injury.[3] The jury found there was sufficient evidence that, although Continue Reading »

Davis Wright Tremane LLP v. State of Alaska, Dep’t of Administration

Posted on February 21st, 2015

[ADMINISTRATIVE LAW] In Davis Wright Tremane LLP v. State of Alaska, Dep’t of Administration,[1] the supreme court held that administrative agencies have the deferential discretion to forbid consideration bids for contracts submitted after the deadline for proposals.[2] A state agency issued a request for proposals for legal services, and a law firm submitted a proposal Continue Reading »

In re Mark V.

Posted on February 21st, 2015

[CIVIL PROCEDURE] In In re Mark V.,[1] the supreme court held the collateral consequences exception to the mootness doctrine does not allow appellate review of an involuntary civil commitment when the committee has had several recent civil commitments and there is no evidence of a procedural defect in the commitment hearing.[2] The superior court ordered Continue Reading »

Page 30 of 47« First...1020...2829303132...40...Last »