Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 25.24.140 (2026)
Orders during action
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 25.24.140. Orders during action.
(a) During the pendency of the action, a spouse may, upon application and in appropriate circumstances, be awarded expenses, including
(1) attorney fees and costs that reasonably approximate the actual fees and costs required to prosecute or defend the action; in applying this paragraph, the court shall take appropriate steps to ensure that the award of attorney fees does not contribute to an unnecessary escalation in the litigation;
(2) reasonable spousal maintenance, including medical expenses; and
(3) reasonable support for minor children in the care of the spouse and reasonable support for unmarried 18-year-old children of the marriage who are actively pursuing a high school diploma or an equivalent level of technical or vocational training and living as dependents with the spouse or designee of the spouse, if there is a legal obligation of the other spouse to provide support.
(b) During the pendency of the action, upon application, a spouse is entitled to necessary protective orders, including orders
(1) providing for the freedom of each spouse from the control of the other spouse;
(2) for protection under AS 18.66.100 — 18.66.180;
(3) directing one spouse to vacate the marital residence or the home of the other spouse;
(4) restraining a spouse from communicating directly or indirectly with the other spouse;
(5) restraining a spouse from entering a propelled vehicle in the possession of or occupied by the other spouse; and
(6) prohibiting a spouse from disposing of the property of either spouse or marital property without the permission of the other spouse or a court order.
(c) Except as provided in (d) and (e) of this section, after a hearing, if both parties agree, the court may also order that the parties engage in personal or family counseling or mediation. In the order, the court shall provide for the payment of the costs of the counseling or mediation.
(d) The court may not order or refer parties to mediation or family counseling under (c) of this section if a protective order issued or filed under AS 18.66.100 — 18.66.180 is in effect. The court may not order or refer parties to mediation or family counseling if a party objects on the grounds that domestic violence has occurred between the parties unless the court finds that the conditions of (e)(1) — (3) of this section are met. If the court proposes or suggests mediation under this subsection,
(1) mediation may not occur unless the victim of the alleged domestic violence agrees to the mediation; and
(2) the court shall advise the parties that each party has the right to not agree to mediation and that the decision of each party will not bias other decisions by the court.
(e) A mediator or family counselor who receives a referral or order from a court to conduct mediation under (c) of this section shall evaluate whether domestic violence has occurred between the parties. A mediator or family counselor may not engage in mediation when either party has committed a crime involving domestic violence unless
(1) mediation or family counseling is requested by the victim of the alleged domestic violence, or proposed by the court and agreed to by the victim;
(2) mediation or family counseling is provided by a mediator or family counselor who is trained in domestic violence in a manner that protects the safety of the victim and any household member, taking into account the results of an assessment of the potential danger posed by the perpetrator and the risk of harm to the victim; and
(3) the victim is permitted to have in attendance a person of the victim's choice, including an attorney.
(a) During the pendency of the action, a spouse may, upon application and in appropriate circumstances, be awarded expenses, including
(1) attorney fees and costs that reasonably approximate the actual fees and costs required to prosecute or defend the action; in applying this paragraph, the court shall take appropriate steps to ensure that the award of attorney fees does not contribute to an unnecessary escalation in the litigation;
(2) reasonable spousal maintenance, including medical expenses; and
(3) reasonable support for minor children in the care of the spouse and reasonable support for unmarried 18-year-old children of the marriage who are actively pursuing a high school diploma or an equivalent level of technical or vocational training and living as dependents with the spouse or designee of the spouse, if there is a legal obligation of the other spouse to provide support.
(b) During the pendency of the action, upon application, a spouse is entitled to necessary protective orders, including orders
(1) providing for the freedom of each spouse from the control of the other spouse;
(2) for protection under AS 18.66.100 — 18.66.180;
(3) directing one spouse to vacate the marital residence or the home of the other spouse;
(4) restraining a spouse from communicating directly or indirectly with the other spouse;
(5) restraining a spouse from entering a propelled vehicle in the possession of or occupied by the other spouse; and
(6) prohibiting a spouse from disposing of the property of either spouse or marital property without the permission of the other spouse or a court order.
(c) Except as provided in (d) and (e) of this section, after a hearing, if both parties agree, the court may also order that the parties engage in personal or family counseling or mediation. In the order, the court shall provide for the payment of the costs of the counseling or mediation.
(d) The court may not order or refer parties to mediation or family counseling under (c) of this section if a protective order issued or filed under AS 18.66.100 — 18.66.180 is in effect. The court may not order or refer parties to mediation or family counseling if a party objects on the grounds that domestic violence has occurred between the parties unless the court finds that the conditions of (e)(1) — (3) of this section are met. If the court proposes or suggests mediation under this subsection,
(1) mediation may not occur unless the victim of the alleged domestic violence agrees to the mediation; and
(2) the court shall advise the parties that each party has the right to not agree to mediation and that the decision of each party will not bias other decisions by the court.
(e) A mediator or family counselor who receives a referral or order from a court to conduct mediation under (c) of this section shall evaluate whether domestic violence has occurred between the parties. A mediator or family counselor may not engage in mediation when either party has committed a crime involving domestic violence unless
(1) mediation or family counseling is requested by the victim of the alleged domestic violence, or proposed by the court and agreed to by the victim;
(2) mediation or family counseling is provided by a mediator or family counselor who is trained in domestic violence in a manner that protects the safety of the victim and any household member, taking into account the results of an assessment of the potential danger posed by the perpetrator and the risk of harm to the victim; and
(3) the victim is permitted to have in attendance a person of the victim's choice, including an attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 66
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case: Koller v. Reft, 71 P.3d 800 (Alaska 2003).
Koller v. Reft, 71 P.3d 800 (Alaska 2003). “115, but rather AS 25.24.140, which contains no similar “faith” requirement.”
Heustess v. Kelley-Heustess, 259 P.3d 462 (Alaska 2011). “'" [71] The court awarded Bonnie attorney's fees "pursuant to AS 25.24.140 and Civil Rule 82." Allen argues the court erred because "Civil Rule 82 does not apply to divorce cases.”
Watega v. Watega, 143 P.3d 658 (Alaska 2006). “[ 8 ] However, as Lesley acknowledges, the California statute being interpreted in Lee, unlike AS 25.24.140, only allows courts to issue restraining orders; it did not contain a court-ordered sale exception.”
Beal v. Beal, 88 P.3d 104 (Alaska 2004). “Interim support orders during the pendency of a divorce are governed by AS 25.24.140, which allows the superior court to provide reasonable attorney's fees, spousal support, and child support.”
Schmitz v. Schmitz, 88 P.3d 1116 (Alaska 2004). “Under AS 25.24.140, trial courts may award attorney's fees in divorce cases.”
Fleegel v. Est. of Boyles, 61 P.3d 1267 (Alaska 2002). “For example, a spouse may seek attorney's fees during a divorce or annulment proceeding under AS 25.24.140. [44] Considerations other than "prevailing party" dictate whether such fees are awarded: "Cost and fee awards in a divorce are not to be based on the prevailing party…”
Mendel-Gleason v. Harris, 261 P.3d 397 (Alaska 2011). “First, Rodvik concerned the award of fees under AS 25.24.140a statute that guides fees in divorce proceedings, not custody modification disputes.”
McDonald v. Trihub, 173 P.3d 416 (Alaska 2007). “The court awarded Yvonne thirty percent of her attorney's fees pursuant to Civil Rule 82(b)(2) and AS 25.24.140(a)(1). While attorney's fees are customarily awarded to the prevailing party under Civil Rule 82, there is an established exception to the rule in divorce cases which…”
Harrower v. Harrower, 71 P.3d 854 (Alaska 2003). “Attorney’s fees in divorce proceedings are governed by AS 25.24.140, 32 which requires the trial court to base its award “primarily on the relative economic situations and earning powers of the parties.”
Fardig v. Fardig, 56 P.3d 9 (Alaska 2002). “Judge Tan did accept the tapes as evidence, but apparently did not consider this evidence to be sufficient under AS 25.24.140(c)(8) to award custody to Owen over Fardig as being in the best interests of the children.”
Johnson v. Johnson, 239 P.3d 393 (Alaska 2010). “13 This "divorce exception" to Rule 82 is based on a broad reading of AS 25.24.140(a)(1), and on the reality that there is usually no prevailing party in a divorce case.”
Siggelkow v. State, 731 P.2d 57 (Alaska 1987). “[6] AS 25.24.140 provides in part: Orders during action.”
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.140(a) — 15 cases
Beal v. Beal, 88 P.3d 104 (Alaska 2004). “Interim support orders during the pendency of a divorce are governed by AS 25.24.140, which allows the superior court to provide reasonable attorney's fees, spousal support, and child support.”
Martin v. Martin, 303 P.3d 421 (Alaska 2013).
Hanson v. Hanson, 125 P.3d 299 (Alaska 2005).
Watega v. Watega, 143 P.3d 658 (Alaska 2006). “[ 8 ] However, as Lesley acknowledges, the California statute being interpreted in Lee, unlike AS 25.24.140, only allows courts to issue restraining orders; it did not contain a court-ordered sale exception.”
Osterkamp v. Stiles, 235 P.3d 178 (Alaska 2010).
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.140(a)(1) — 33 cases
Koller v. Reft, 71 P.3d 800 (Alaska 2003). “115, but rather AS 25.24.140, which contains no similar “faith” requirement.”
Schmitz v. Schmitz, 88 P.3d 1116 (Alaska 2004). “Under AS 25.24.140, trial courts may award attorney's fees in divorce cases.”
McDonald v. Trihub, 173 P.3d 416 (Alaska 2007). “The court awarded Yvonne thirty percent of her attorney's fees pursuant to Civil Rule 82(b)(2) and AS 25.24.140(a)(1). While attorney's fees are customarily awarded to the prevailing party under Civil Rule 82, there is an established exception to the rule in divorce cases which…”
Johnson v. Johnson, 239 P.3d 393 (Alaska 2010). “13 This "divorce exception" to Rule 82 is based on a broad reading of AS 25.24.140(a)(1), and on the reality that there is usually no prevailing party in a divorce case.”
Hilliker v. Hilliker, 828 P.2d 1205 (Alaska 1992).
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.140(a)(2) — 5 cases
Beal v. Beal, 88 P.3d 104 (Alaska 2004). “Interim support orders during the pendency of a divorce are governed by AS 25.24.140, which allows the superior court to provide reasonable attorney's fees, spousal support, and child support.”
Brennan v. Brennan, 425 P.3d 99 (Alaska 2018).
Edelman v. Edelman, 3 P.3d 348 (Alaska 2000).
Streb v. Streb, 774 P.2d 798 (Alaska 1989).
Mark Daum v. Kimberly Daum, 518 P.3d 718 (Alaska 2022).
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.140(a)(3) — 3 cases
Sanders v. Sanders, 902 P.2d 310 (Alaska 1995).
Siggelkow v. State, 731 P.2d 57 (Alaska 1987). “[6] AS 25.24.140 provides in part: Orders during action.”
Gallant v. Gallant, 945 P.2d 795 (Alaska 1997).
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.140(a)(l) — 1 case
Koller v. Reft, 71 P.3d 800 (Alaska 2003). “115, but rather AS 25.24.140, which contains no similar “faith” requirement.”
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.140(b) — 2 cases
Watega v. Watega, 143 P.3d 658 (Alaska 2006). “[ 8 ] However, as Lesley acknowledges, the California statute being interpreted in Lee, unlike AS 25.24.140, only allows courts to issue restraining orders; it did not contain a court-ordered sale exception.”
Morris v. Horn, 219 P.3d 198 (Alaska 2009).
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.140(b)(1) — 1 case
Berry v. Berry, 277 P.3d 771 (Alaska 2012).
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.140(b)(6) — 2 cases
Watega v. Watega, 143 P.3d 658 (Alaska 2006). “[ 8 ] However, as Lesley acknowledges, the California statute being interpreted in Lee, unlike AS 25.24.140, only allows courts to issue restraining orders; it did not contain a court-ordered sale exception.”
Orville Wesley Jenkins Layton v. Mary Tabitha O'Dea, f/k/a Mary Tabitha O-Dea-Layton, 515 P.3d 92 (Alaska 2022).
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.140(c)(8) — 1 case
Fardig v. Fardig, 56 P.3d 9 (Alaska 2002). “Judge Tan did accept the tapes as evidence, but apparently did not consider this evidence to be sufficient under AS 25.24.140(c)(8) to award custody to Owen over Fardig as being in the best interests of the children.”
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.140(d)(1) — 1 case
Hodge v. Sorba, 31 P.3d 1273 (Alaska 2001).
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.