In Leahy v. Conant,[1] the supreme court held that public officials have qualified immunity from civil liability when there is no showing that they act unreasonably in following a government directive. An Alaska Department of Corrections (DOC) directive prohibited mail from being sent between prisoners. Leahy, a Muslim inmate, filed suit against two correctional facility Continue Reading »
In In re Hospitalization of Connor J.,[1] the supreme court held that the superior court did not commit “plain error” by relying on a committee’s attorney’s assertion that the committee was waiving his right to appear at a commitment hearing. The committee, Connor, was not present at a hearing before a standing master to determine Continue Reading »
In Matter of Linda M.,[1] the supreme court held that civil commitment proceedings to treat mental illness may be held sequentially or concurrently with criminal commitment proceedings to treat incompetency to stand trial.[2] Linda M. was found incompetent to stand trial for criminal charges and committed to Alaska Psychiatric Institute (API) for restoration of competency, Continue Reading »
In Mitchell v. Mitchell,[1] the supreme court held that a wife’s challenge to a long-term protective order that had been later dissolved as unlawfully granted was dismissed as moot and neither the public interest nor the collateral consequences exceptions to the mootness doctrine applied. During the course of a short term domestic violence protective order Continue Reading »
In Reynolds-Rogers v. Department of Health & Social Services,[1] the supreme court held that an employee is precluded from bringing a wrongful termination claim against her employer after a union settles her grievances with that employer. The Department of Health & Human Services (DHHS) employed Rogers for seven years, during which time Rogers filed five Continue Reading »
In Robinson v. Alaska Housing Finance Corporation,[1] the supreme court held that claims for wrongful termination of a lease are barred by res judicata if parties have agreed to dismiss an earlier claim with prejudice. The Robinsons participated in a federal housing voucher program through the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) which paid for part Continue Reading »
