Year In Review

Licht v. Irwin

Posted on October 25th, 2013

[CIVIL PROCEDURE]  In Licht v. Irwin,[1] the supreme court held an unrelated third party may substituted for a deceased appellant if it can establish independent standing.[2] Dr. Haber filed a request for reconsideration after the Department of Natural Resources (“DNR”) declassified specific lands as wildlife habitat.[3] While appealing DNR’s denial in the lower court, Dr. Continue Reading »

In re Cummings

Posted on October 25th, 2013

[ETHICS]  In In re Cummings,[1] the supreme court held that removal is an appropriate sanction for a district court judge’s ex parte communications with an assistant district attorney (“ADA”) when the judge alerts the attorney to memorandum opinions supporting the attorney’s position in a case pending before the judge.[2] In April 2012, the Alaska Commission Continue Reading »

Thea G. v. State, Dep’t of Health & Social Services

Posted on October 25th, 2013

[FAMILY LAW]  In Thea G. v. State, Dep’t of Health & Social Services,[1] the supreme court held that, under the Indian Child Welfare Act (“ICWA”), a person providing the expert testimony necessary to dissolve parental rights does not need to be an expert in Native culture.[2] Thea, the mother of two Indian children, had a Continue Reading »

Year In Review

Licht v. Irwin

Posted on October 25th, 2013

[CIVIL PROCEDURE]  In Licht v. Irwin,[1] the supreme court held an unrelated third party may substituted for a deceased appellant if it can establish independent standing.[2] Dr. Haber filed a request for reconsideration after the Department of Natural Resources (“DNR”) declassified specific lands as wildlife habitat.[3] While appealing DNR’s denial in the lower court, Dr. Continue Reading »

In re Cummings

Posted on October 25th, 2013

[ETHICS]  In In re Cummings,[1] the supreme court held that removal is an appropriate sanction for a district court judge’s ex parte communications with an assistant district attorney (“ADA”) when the judge alerts the attorney to memorandum opinions supporting the attorney’s position in a case pending before the judge.[2] In April 2012, the Alaska Commission Continue Reading »

Thea G. v. State, Dep’t of Health & Social Services

Posted on October 25th, 2013

[FAMILY LAW]  In Thea G. v. State, Dep’t of Health & Social Services,[1] the supreme court held that, under the Indian Child Welfare Act (“ICWA”), a person providing the expert testimony necessary to dissolve parental rights does not need to be an expert in Native culture.[2] Thea, the mother of two Indian children, had a Continue Reading »