Year In Review

Lenz v. State

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CRIMINAL LAW]   In Lenz v. State[1], the court of appeals held a defendant’s equal protection rights are not violated when a codefendant receives a more favorable offer in plea bargaining.[2] In May 2012, Anthony Lenz and Glen Anderkay burglarized and vandalized an Anchorage laundromat.[3] Both men were initially charged with two felonies and one Continue Reading »

Ray v. Draeger

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CIVIL PROCEDURE]   In Ray v. Draeger,[1] the supreme court held that it was an abuse of discretion to exclude evidence of an expert witness’s substantial connection to the insurance industry.[2] Draeger experienced and sought treatments for neck and back pain following an auto accident caused by Ray.[3] Draeger sued Ray, defended by her insurance Continue Reading »

Snowden v. State

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CRIMINAL LAW]   In Snowden v. State[1], the court of appeals held that the search of a residence after an open-line 911 call is lawful if the totality of the circumstances gave the officers reasonable grounds to believe an emergency was occurring.[2] At around 3:00 in the morning, the police received a 911 call in which the Continue Reading »

Byford v. State

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CRIMINAL LAW]   In Byford v. State,[1] the court of appeals held that in order to convict a defendant of scheme to defraud, a jury does not have to unanimously agree on whether a defendant’s scheme was intended to defraud five or more people, or to fraudulently obtain $10,000 or more.[2] After defrauding nine people Continue Reading »

Sarah D. v. John D.

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[FAMILY LAW]   In Sarah D. v. John D., the supreme court held that domestic violence must be considered in custody hearings where one party has ever intended to place the other in fear of imminent harm.[1] The mother and father separated after their daughter turned three.[2] In divorce and custody proceedings, both parties made Continue Reading »

Jacko v. State, Pebble Ltd. Partnership

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CIVIL PROCEDURE]   In Jacko v. State, Pebble Ltd. Partnership, the supreme court held under the implied preemption standard, a state law conferring gatekeeper authority to a state department preempts an initiative granting a borough veto power.[1] Lake and Peninsula Borough voters passed a law prohibiting mining activities with a negative impact on certain waters Continue Reading »

Cooper v. Thompson

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CIVIL PROCEDURE]   In Cooper v. Thompson,[1] the supreme court held that a lower court erred in excluding evidence of domestic violence in a case that evaluated compensatory damages relating to a continuing injury from an automobile accident.[2] In 2008, Cooper, a driver for Central Plumbing & Heating, caused a car accident that injured Thompson.[3] Continue Reading »

Nunamta Alukestai v. State

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[ADMINISTRATIVE LAW]   In Nunamta Alukestai v. State,[1] the supreme court held Miscellaneous Land Use Permits allowing intensive mineral exploration on state land are functionally irrevocable, and thus convey state interests in land for which public notice is required prior to the disposal of such interests.[2] Pebble Limited Partnership (“PLP”) applied for, and received, a Continue Reading »

Devine v. Great Divide Insurance Co.

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[INSURANCE LAW]   In Devine v. Great Divide Insurance Co.,[1] the supreme court held that a commercial general liability insurance policy’s employee exclusion applies when an injury occurs during employment.[2] Generally, employers may purchase three types of non-overlapping insurance: general commercial liability, workers’ compensation, and employers’ liability.[3] Chatari, a business owner, had general commercial liability Continue Reading »

Hutton v. State

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CRIMINAL LAW]   In Hutton v. State,[1] the supreme court held that appellate courts reviewing the validity of a waiver of the right to jury trial must review relevant factual findings for clear error and the ultimate conclusion regarding the waiver’s validity de novo.[2] Hutton was on trial for weapons misconduct in the third degree Continue Reading »

Year In Review

Lenz v. State

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CRIMINAL LAW]   In Lenz v. State[1], the court of appeals held a defendant’s equal protection rights are not violated when a codefendant receives a more favorable offer in plea bargaining.[2] In May 2012, Anthony Lenz and Glen Anderkay burglarized and vandalized an Anchorage laundromat.[3] Both men were initially charged with two felonies and one Continue Reading »

Ray v. Draeger

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CIVIL PROCEDURE]   In Ray v. Draeger,[1] the supreme court held that it was an abuse of discretion to exclude evidence of an expert witness’s substantial connection to the insurance industry.[2] Draeger experienced and sought treatments for neck and back pain following an auto accident caused by Ray.[3] Draeger sued Ray, defended by her insurance Continue Reading »

Snowden v. State

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CRIMINAL LAW]   In Snowden v. State[1], the court of appeals held that the search of a residence after an open-line 911 call is lawful if the totality of the circumstances gave the officers reasonable grounds to believe an emergency was occurring.[2] At around 3:00 in the morning, the police received a 911 call in which the Continue Reading »

Byford v. State

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CRIMINAL LAW]   In Byford v. State,[1] the court of appeals held that in order to convict a defendant of scheme to defraud, a jury does not have to unanimously agree on whether a defendant’s scheme was intended to defraud five or more people, or to fraudulently obtain $10,000 or more.[2] After defrauding nine people Continue Reading »

Sarah D. v. John D.

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[FAMILY LAW]   In Sarah D. v. John D., the supreme court held that domestic violence must be considered in custody hearings where one party has ever intended to place the other in fear of imminent harm.[1] The mother and father separated after their daughter turned three.[2] In divorce and custody proceedings, both parties made Continue Reading »

Jacko v. State, Pebble Ltd. Partnership

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CIVIL PROCEDURE]   In Jacko v. State, Pebble Ltd. Partnership, the supreme court held under the implied preemption standard, a state law conferring gatekeeper authority to a state department preempts an initiative granting a borough veto power.[1] Lake and Peninsula Borough voters passed a law prohibiting mining activities with a negative impact on certain waters Continue Reading »

Cooper v. Thompson

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CIVIL PROCEDURE]   In Cooper v. Thompson,[1] the supreme court held that a lower court erred in excluding evidence of domestic violence in a case that evaluated compensatory damages relating to a continuing injury from an automobile accident.[2] In 2008, Cooper, a driver for Central Plumbing & Heating, caused a car accident that injured Thompson.[3] Continue Reading »

Nunamta Alukestai v. State

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[ADMINISTRATIVE LAW]   In Nunamta Alukestai v. State,[1] the supreme court held Miscellaneous Land Use Permits allowing intensive mineral exploration on state land are functionally irrevocable, and thus convey state interests in land for which public notice is required prior to the disposal of such interests.[2] Pebble Limited Partnership (“PLP”) applied for, and received, a Continue Reading »

Devine v. Great Divide Insurance Co.

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[INSURANCE LAW]   In Devine v. Great Divide Insurance Co.,[1] the supreme court held that a commercial general liability insurance policy’s employee exclusion applies when an injury occurs during employment.[2] Generally, employers may purchase three types of non-overlapping insurance: general commercial liability, workers’ compensation, and employers’ liability.[3] Chatari, a business owner, had general commercial liability Continue Reading »

Hutton v. State

Posted on November 29th, 2015

[CRIMINAL LAW]   In Hutton v. State,[1] the supreme court held that appellate courts reviewing the validity of a waiver of the right to jury trial must review relevant factual findings for clear error and the ultimate conclusion regarding the waiver’s validity de novo.[2] Hutton was on trial for weapons misconduct in the third degree Continue Reading »