NATIVE LAW, FAMILY LAW Mary Beth Barksdale In Clark J. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Office of Children’s Services, 483 P.3d 896 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court reversed the Superior Court’s termination of parental rights, finding clear error where the Office of Children’s Services (OCS) had failed to make active efforts to Continue Reading »
FAMILY LAW Clara Nieman In Christensen v. Seckin, 486 P.2d 181 (Alaska 2021), the supreme court held that Alaska lacked jurisdiction to modify child custody or support orders entered in a foreign country unless specific conditions were met. (Id. at 187). Seckin and Christensen married in 2012, Seckin gave birth to the couple’s child in Continue Reading »
FAMILY LAW Jacob Keohane Continue Reading »
FAMILY LAW Christopher Dodd In Cora G. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, the supreme court held that in child in need of aid (CINA) matters, an expert witness providing a statutorily-required opinion must be offered and affirmatively accepted as a qualified expert witness. The Office of Child Services (OCS) petitioned to terminate Continue Reading »
FAMILY LAW Macklin Willigan In Vogus v. Vogus, the supreme court held that when a superior court imputes income to an obligor parent, the court may base its calculation on either (1) concrete evidence of the obligor’s historical earnings—unless the obligor demonstrates that she is unable to achieve similar income—or (2) its specific findings of Continue Reading »
FAMILY LAW Natalie Howard In Angelica C. v. Jonathan C., the supreme court held it was legal error to ignore the father’s sexual abuse of the mother when analyzing factors to determine best interests of the child in awarding custody. Jonathan pleaded guilty to attempted sexual abuse of a minor in the second degree after Continue Reading »
FAMILY LAW Mike Keramidas In M.M. ex rel. Kirkland v. State, Department of Administration, the supreme court held that (1) the Office of Public Advocacy (OPA) could contract with third-party service providers to fulfill its duty of providing wards with in-person quarterly visits, and (2) a “next friend” could not be held personally liable for Continue Reading »
FAMILY LAW Angela Sbano In C.D. v. State, the supreme court held that fairness required the court to establish an exclusionary rule whereby a minor’s own testimonial evidence at a waiver hearing could not subsequently be used against him as evidence in juvenile adjudication or adult criminal proceedings. 15-year-old C.D. was charged with first degree Continue Reading »
FAMILY LAW Melissa English In State, Department of Health & Social Services v. Dara S., the supreme court held that the superior court did not clearly err by reinstating a mother’s parental rights, finding that this was in the best interest of the child. In a previous decision, the supreme court held that a superior Continue Reading »
FAMILY LAW Daisy Gray In Mauritsen v. Mauristen, the supreme court held that courts should interpret the phrase “presently resides” in the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA) consistently with “residency” in AS 0.01.10.055. In 2016, the superior court entered a custody agreement that provided equal shared physical custody between Mauritsen and Mauritsen Continue Reading »
