Simpson v. State, Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (2004) alaska“" 45 Therefore, if the optimum number exceeded the maximum number, the controlling statute would be AS 16.43.380, not AS 16.48.290, the statute Simpson cites.”
Younker v. Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (1979) alaska“” AS 16.43.380(3). Thus, the Commission’s definition of past participation coincides with the legislative view that hardship be measured according to the actual taking of fish in the past.”
State, Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission v. Templeton (1979) alaska“15, 1976), the Commission has interpreted the Limited Entry Act as authorizing issuance of a permit only to an individual, natural person, and not to partners, a partnership, or a corporation, AS 16.43.380(5); the Commission believes that the law of partnership independently…”
Younker v. Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission (1979) alaska“” AS 16.43.380(3). Thus, the Commission’s definition of past participation coincides with the legislative view that hardship be measured according to the actual taking of fish in the past.”
State, Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission v. Templeton (1979) alaska“15, 1976), the Commission has interpreted the Limited Entry Act as authorizing issuance of a permit only to an individual, natural person, and not to partners, a partnership, or a corporation, AS 16.43.380(5); the Commission believes that the law of partnership independently…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.