Alaska Stat. » Chapter 23.10
Alaska Statutes

Alaska Stat. § 23.10.130 (2026)

Statute of limitations

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AK-LEGakleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 23.10.130. Statute of limitations.
An action for unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime compensation, or liquidated damages under AS 23.10.050 — 23.10.150 is forever barred unless it is started within two years after the cause of action accrues. For the purposes of this section an action is considered to be started on the date when the complaint is filed.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1981–2019 · leading case: Nolan v. Sea Airmotive, Inc., 627 P.2d 1035 (Alaska 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nolan v. Sea Airmotive, Inc., 627 P.2d 1035 (Alaska 1981). · cites it 16× “In January 1980, Sea Airmotive sought dismissal of the claims of the unnamed class members, arguing that their claims were barred by the statute of limitations contained in AS 23.10.130. 4 The plaintiffs opposed the dismissal and also sought approval of notice to the class,…”
Quinn v. Alaska State Employees Ass'n/Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees, Local 52, 944 P.2d 468 (Alaska 1997). · cites it 8× “See AS 23.10.130. 3 The court did not apply the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) three-year statute of limitation.”
Brown v. Knowles, 307 P.3d 915 (Alaska 2013). · cites it 2× “59 AS 23.10.130. 60 AS 23.10.145; Quinn v. State Emps.”
Bliss v. Bobich, 971 P.2d 141 (Alaska 1998). · cites it 2× “§ 255 (1985); AS 23.10.130. But upon proof of a willful failure to pay overtime, the FLSA allows overtime damages reaching three years back from the time of filing.”
Fred Meyer of Alaska, Inc. v. Bailey, 100 P.3d 881 (Alaska 2004). “AS 23.10.130 provides: An action for unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime compensation, or liquidated damages under AS 23.”
Dayhoff v. Temsco Helicopters, Inc., 772 P.2d 1085 (Alaska 1989). “AS 23.10.130. The unpaid prevailing wage claims are governed by the two-year statute of limitations found in AS 09.”
Bruns v. Mun. of Anchorage, Anchorage Water & Wastewater Util., 32 P.3d 362 (Alaska 2001). “See AS 23.10.130. The plaintiffs claim that there is interference because the state limitations period may lapse in the time that it takes to pursue administrative remedies under AMC 3.”
Air Logistics of Alaska, Inc. v. Throop, 181 P.3d 1084 (Alaska 2008). “AS 23.10.130 (emphasis added). 40 . 703 P.”
Fred Meyer of Alaska, Inc. v. Adams, 963 P.2d 1025 (Alaska 1998). “AS 23.10.130. 8 . In Nolan , we resolved a conflict between the AWHA and class action tolling, concluding that in light of American Pipe , the statute of limitations tolls for all putative members of the class, whether named or unnamed in the complaint.”
Sleeper v. URS Midwest, Inc., 347 F. Supp. 3d 408 (D. Alaska 2018). “See AS 23.10.130 ("An action for unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime compensation, or liquidated damages under AS 23.”
Ozenna v. State, 921 P.2d 640 (Alaska Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 4× “A new statute, AS 23.10.130(b), clearly provided that the filing of a class action tolled the statute of limitations only with respect to the named plaintiffs, not the entire class.”
Lane v. United Road Servs. Midwest (D. Alaska 2019). “AS 23.10.130. Plaintiff commenced this action on October 30, 2017.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— Alaska Stat. § 23.10.130(a) — 1 case
Nolan v. Sea Airmotive, Inc., 627 P.2d 1035 (Alaska 1981). “In January 1980, Sea Airmotive sought dismissal of the claims of the unnamed class members, arguing that their claims were barred by the statute of limitations contained in AS 23.10.130. 4 The plaintiffs opposed the dismissal and also sought approval of notice to the class,…”
— Alaska Stat. § 23.10.130(b) — 2 cases
Nolan v. Sea Airmotive, Inc., 627 P.2d 1035 (Alaska 1981). “In January 1980, Sea Airmotive sought dismissal of the claims of the unnamed class members, arguing that their claims were barred by the statute of limitations contained in AS 23.10.130. 4 The plaintiffs opposed the dismissal and also sought approval of notice to the class,…”
Ozenna v. State, 921 P.2d 640 (Alaska Ct. App. 1996). “A new statute, AS 23.10.130(b), clearly provided that the filing of a class action tolled the statute of limitations only with respect to the named plaintiffs, not the entire class.”
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.