Year In Review

Geotek Alaska, Inc. v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[CIVIL PROCEDURE] In Geotek Alaska, Inc. v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.,[1] the supreme court held that the right to decline arbitration shall only be decided by the court, not the arbitrator.[2] The arbitrator was overseeing a contract dispute between Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. and GeoTek Alaska.[3] Jacobs did not have a contract with GeoTek, but Continue Reading »

Fernandez v. Fernandez

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[CIVIL PROCEDURE] In Fernandez v. Fernandez,[1] the supreme court held that the lower court did not abuse its discretion under Alaska Civil Rule 60(b) in concluding that a sham marriage dissolution filing constituted fraud upon the court.[2] The Fernandezes filed for dissolution of their marriage in 1986 after having two children together, but they continued Continue Reading »

Pacifica Marine, Inc. v. Solomon Gold, Inc.

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[ADMINISTRATIVE LAW]   In Pacifica Marine, Inc. v. Solomon Gold, Inc.,[1] the supreme court held that the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources can make a final decision on mineral bidding issues, so long as the decision is supported by substantial evidence and not arbitrary.[2] In 2011, the Department of Natural Resources (Department) auctioned Continue Reading »

DeVilbiss v. Matanuska-Susitna Borough

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[ADMINISTRATIVE LAW] In DeVilbiss v. Matanuska-Susitna Borough,[1] the court held that although the legislature provides a remedy for property owners wishing to have their property excluded from a road service area (“RSA”), the remedy is not mandatory and that such requests may be denied.[2] In 1981, an RSA in Matanuska-Susitna Borough was expanded by annexing Continue Reading »

Remy M. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[FAMILY LAW] In Remy M. v. Dept. of Health & Social Services,[1] the supreme court held that a trial court did not violate a father’s right to due process when it failed to tell him that he had a right to testify and allowed his attorney to waive his right to testify.[2] In 2014, the Continue Reading »

Horne v. Touhakis

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[FAMILY LAW] In Horne v. Touhakis [1], the supreme court held that the lower court’s lack of factual findings in determining imputed income were insufficient for appellate review of the decision.[2] Horne and Touhakis were involved in an extended romantic relationship, during which Touhakis adopted a child.[3] After the relationship terminated, Horne received visitation rights and Continue Reading »

Saepharn v. State

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[CRIMINAL PROCEDURE] In Saepharn v. State, the court of appeals held that an officer’s pat-down search did not exceed lawful limits when there was probable cause to believe the target was in possession of a controlled substance.[1] The defendant was charged with fourth-degree controlled substance misconduct after police searched him for weapons and instead felt Continue Reading »

Manning v. State, Department of Fish & Game

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[CIVIL PROCEDURE] In Manning v. State, Department of Fish & Game,[1] the supreme court held that attorneys’ fees cannot be awarded for work on procedural aspects of a constitutional lawsuit unless the fee applicant can prove the procedural work was solely related to a non-constitutional aspect of the lawsuit.[2] In 2011, Kenneth Manning brought both Continue Reading »

Matthew P. v. Gail S.

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[FAMILY LAW] In Matthew P. v. Gail S.,[1] the supreme court held that the superior court’s evaluation of a child’s emotional needs, as well as the willingness and ability of each parent to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing relationship between the other parent and the child, as factors in determining whether shared physical Continue Reading »

Duenas-Rendon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[CONTRACT LAW] In Duenas-Rendon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A,[1] the supreme court held that no additional notice is due to a borrower when a lender has provided notice of default and intention to foreclose, even if the lender continues accepting payments after a notice of default.[2] When Duenas-Rendon failed to make her mortgage payments, Wells Continue Reading »

Year In Review

Geotek Alaska, Inc. v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[CIVIL PROCEDURE] In Geotek Alaska, Inc. v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.,[1] the supreme court held that the right to decline arbitration shall only be decided by the court, not the arbitrator.[2] The arbitrator was overseeing a contract dispute between Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. and GeoTek Alaska.[3] Jacobs did not have a contract with GeoTek, but Continue Reading »

Fernandez v. Fernandez

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[CIVIL PROCEDURE] In Fernandez v. Fernandez,[1] the supreme court held that the lower court did not abuse its discretion under Alaska Civil Rule 60(b) in concluding that a sham marriage dissolution filing constituted fraud upon the court.[2] The Fernandezes filed for dissolution of their marriage in 1986 after having two children together, but they continued Continue Reading »

Pacifica Marine, Inc. v. Solomon Gold, Inc.

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[ADMINISTRATIVE LAW]   In Pacifica Marine, Inc. v. Solomon Gold, Inc.,[1] the supreme court held that the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources can make a final decision on mineral bidding issues, so long as the decision is supported by substantial evidence and not arbitrary.[2] In 2011, the Department of Natural Resources (Department) auctioned Continue Reading »

DeVilbiss v. Matanuska-Susitna Borough

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[ADMINISTRATIVE LAW] In DeVilbiss v. Matanuska-Susitna Borough,[1] the court held that although the legislature provides a remedy for property owners wishing to have their property excluded from a road service area (“RSA”), the remedy is not mandatory and that such requests may be denied.[2] In 1981, an RSA in Matanuska-Susitna Borough was expanded by annexing Continue Reading »

Remy M. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[FAMILY LAW] In Remy M. v. Dept. of Health & Social Services,[1] the supreme court held that a trial court did not violate a father’s right to due process when it failed to tell him that he had a right to testify and allowed his attorney to waive his right to testify.[2] In 2014, the Continue Reading »

Horne v. Touhakis

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[FAMILY LAW] In Horne v. Touhakis [1], the supreme court held that the lower court’s lack of factual findings in determining imputed income were insufficient for appellate review of the decision.[2] Horne and Touhakis were involved in an extended romantic relationship, during which Touhakis adopted a child.[3] After the relationship terminated, Horne received visitation rights and Continue Reading »

Saepharn v. State

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[CRIMINAL PROCEDURE] In Saepharn v. State, the court of appeals held that an officer’s pat-down search did not exceed lawful limits when there was probable cause to believe the target was in possession of a controlled substance.[1] The defendant was charged with fourth-degree controlled substance misconduct after police searched him for weapons and instead felt Continue Reading »

Manning v. State, Department of Fish & Game

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[CIVIL PROCEDURE] In Manning v. State, Department of Fish & Game,[1] the supreme court held that attorneys’ fees cannot be awarded for work on procedural aspects of a constitutional lawsuit unless the fee applicant can prove the procedural work was solely related to a non-constitutional aspect of the lawsuit.[2] In 2011, Kenneth Manning brought both Continue Reading »

Matthew P. v. Gail S.

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[FAMILY LAW] In Matthew P. v. Gail S.,[1] the supreme court held that the superior court’s evaluation of a child’s emotional needs, as well as the willingness and ability of each parent to facilitate and encourage a close and continuing relationship between the other parent and the child, as factors in determining whether shared physical Continue Reading »

Duenas-Rendon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Posted on March 30th, 2016

[CONTRACT LAW] In Duenas-Rendon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A,[1] the supreme court held that no additional notice is due to a borrower when a lender has provided notice of default and intention to foreclose, even if the lender continues accepting payments after a notice of default.[2] When Duenas-Rendon failed to make her mortgage payments, Wells Continue Reading »