CIVIL PROCEDURE
Supreme Court of Alaska (2023)
Hannah Berg
In Buchholdt v. Nelson, 534 P.3d 91 (Alaska 2023), the supreme court held that an unsupported and unsworn assertion made for the first time on appeal is insufficient to demonstrate that a trial court committed legal error or abused its discretion in denying a motion for relief. (Id. at 94).
Nelson filed a legal malpractice lawsuit against his former attorneys, Buchholdt and Gonzalez-Powell. (Id. at 92). While incarcerated and representing himself, Nelson sent a summons and complaint to Buchholdt’s law office. (Id.). “Suz Miller,” who Nelson claimed was Buchholdt’s paralegal, signed receipt of the documents. (Id.). The return receipt identified Miller as Buchholdt’s “agent.” (Id.). The court issued Buchholdt a Notice of Dismissal for Failure to Serve. (Id.). The supreme court took into consideration that when Buchholdt filed for bankruptcy, he listed Nelson’s lawsuit, identified by case number, as one of his contingent liabilities. (Id. at 93-94). Additionally, Buchholdt failed to rebut that Miller was his agent and the claim that he was properly served. (Id. at 94). The supreme court affirmed, ruling that an unsubstantiated and unsworn claim presented for the first time during an appeal is inadequate to establish that a lower court committed a legal error or acted improperly in denying a motion for relief. (Id. at 94).
