Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 23.30.115 (2026)
Attendance and fees of witnesses
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 23.30.115. Attendance and fees of witnesses.
(a) A person is not required to attend as a witness in a proceeding before the board at a place more than 100 miles from the person's place of residence, unless the person's lawful mileage and fee for one day's attendance is first paid or tendered to the person; but the testimony of a witness may be taken by deposition or interrogatories according to the Rules of Civil Procedure.
(b) A witness summoned in a proceeding before the board or whose deposition is taken shall receive the same fees and mileage as a witness in the superior court.
(a) A person is not required to attend as a witness in a proceeding before the board at a place more than 100 miles from the person's place of residence, unless the person's lawful mileage and fee for one day's attendance is first paid or tendered to the person; but the testimony of a witness may be taken by deposition or interrogatories according to the Rules of Civil Procedure.
(b) A witness summoned in a proceeding before the board or whose deposition is taken shall receive the same fees and mileage as a witness in the superior court.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1976–2023 · leading case: Com. Union Companies v. Smallwood, 550 P.2d 1261 (Alaska 1976).
Com. Union Companies v. Smallwood, 550 P.2d 1261 (Alaska 1976). “AS 23.30.115; AS 44.62.430. In Alaska the party requesting subpoena must pay the fees, mileage, and expenses of the subpoenaed *1267 witness.”
State of Alaska, Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs. v. Jennifer D. White & John P. Shannon, D.C., 529 P.3d 534 (Alaska 2023). “Similarly, API’s only argument on appeal regarding compensability is related to its theory of the chiropractic statute’s meaning. Because API did not otherwise challenge the Commission’s conclusion that the treatments were 8 AAC 45.”
— Alaska Stat. § 23.30.115(a) — 1 case
State of Alaska, Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs. v. Jennifer D. White & John P. Shannon, D.C., 529 P.3d 534 (Alaska 2023). “Similarly, API’s only argument on appeal regarding compensability is related to its theory of the chiropractic statute’s meaning. Because API did not otherwise challenge the Commission’s conclusion that the treatments were 8 AAC 45.”
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.