Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 25.24.230 (2026)
Judgment
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 25.24.230. Judgment.
(a) If the petition is filed under AS 25.24.200(a), and is not subject to AS 25.24.220(h), the court may grant the spouses a final decree of dissolution and shall order other relief as provided in this section if the court, upon consideration of the information contained in the petition and the testimony of the spouse or spouses at the hearing, finds that
(1) the spouses understand fully the nature and consequences of their action;
(2) the written agreements between the spouses concerning spousal maintenance and tax consequences, if any, division of property, including retirement benefits, and allocation of obligations are fair and just and constitute the entire agreement between the parties;
(3) the spousal maintenance and division of property fairly allocate the economic effect of dissolution and take into consideration the factors listed in AS 25.24.160(a)(2) and (4);
(4) each spouse entered into the agreement voluntarily and free from the coercion of another person;
(5) the conditions in AS 25.24.200(a) have been met; and
(6) the written agreements between the spouses concerning ownership or joint ownership of an animal take into consideration the well-being of the animal.
(b) If the petition is filed under AS 25.24.200(a) and is subject to AS 25.24.220(h), the court may grant the spouses a final decree of dissolution and shall order other relief as provided in this section if the court, upon consideration of the information contained in the petition and the testimony of the spouse or spouses at the hearing, finds that
(1) the spouses understand fully the nature and consequences of their action;
(2) the written agreements between the spouses concerning child custody, child support, and visitation are in the best interest of the children of the marriage, constitute the entire agreement of the parties on child custody, child support, and visitation and, as between the spouses, are just;
(3) the written agreements between the spouses concerning spousal maintenance and tax consequences, if any, division of property, including retirement benefits, and allocation of obligations are just and constitute the entire agreement between the parties;
(4) the spousal maintenance and division of property fairly allocate the economic effect of dissolution and take into consideration the factors listed in AS 25.24.160(a)(2) and (4);
(5) each spouse entered the agreement voluntarily and free from the coercion of another person; and
(6) the conditions in AS 25.24.200(a) have been met.
(c) If the petition is filed by one spouse under AS 25.24.200(b), the court may grant the spouse a final decree of dissolution and change the petitioner's name, if so requested, if the court, upon consideration of affidavits supplied by the spouse and the testimony of the spouse at the hearing, finds that
(1) the spouse present at the hearing understands fully the nature and consequences of the action;
(2) the conditions in AS 25.24.200(b) have been met; and
(3) the requirements of AS 25.24.165(b) have been satisfied, if a change of name is requested.
(d) The court shall dismiss a petition or continue action on a petition filed under AS 25.24.200 — 25.24.260 before findings are made if
(1) a representative of the unmarried children who are under the age of 19 objects to a term of an agreement between the spouses;
(2) either of the spouses withdraws from an agreement required under AS 25.24.200(a); or
(3) the petition alleges that the conditions in AS 25.24.200(b) exist, but the whereabouts of the absent spouse becomes known to the other spouse or the court before findings are made.
(e) The court shall deny the relief sought in a petition filed under AS 25.24.200 — 25.24.260 if the court does not make the findings required under (a) — (c) of this section.
(f) If the petition is filed by both spouses under AS 25.24.200(a), the court shall change either spouse's name, if the spouse seeking a change of name to a name other than a prior name complies with AS 25.24.165(b), and shall fully and specifically set out in the decree the written agreements of the spouses and shall order the performance of those written agreements. The court shall also state, in the decree, whether child support payments are to be made through the child support services agency. If the petition is filed by one spouse under AS 25.24.200(b), the decree must state that it does not bar future action on the issues not resolved in the decree.
(g) Notwithstanding other provisions of AS 25.24.200 — 25.24.260, the court may not award to one spouse real or personal property acquired by the other spouse before the date of the marriage, unless the spouses expressly agree otherwise or the court determines that the property should be made available, by sale or other conveyance, to ensure that the best interests of the children are provided for. If the court determines that the best interests of the children require an award of premarital property, but the spouses do not agree, the court shall dismiss or continue the action.
(h) If a judgment under this section distributes benefits to an alternate payee under AS 14.25, AS 21.51.120(a), AS 21.54.020(c), 21.54.050(c), AS 22.25, AS 26.05.222 — 26.05.226, or AS 39.35, the judgment must meet the requirements of a qualified domestic relations order under the definition of that phrase that is applicable to those provisions.
(i) For each judgment issued under this section, the court shall include in the records relating to the matter the social security numbers, if ascertainable, of the following persons:
(1) each party to the dissolution of marriage;
(2) each child whose rights are addressed in the judgment.
(a) If the petition is filed under AS 25.24.200(a), and is not subject to AS 25.24.220(h), the court may grant the spouses a final decree of dissolution and shall order other relief as provided in this section if the court, upon consideration of the information contained in the petition and the testimony of the spouse or spouses at the hearing, finds that
(1) the spouses understand fully the nature and consequences of their action;
(2) the written agreements between the spouses concerning spousal maintenance and tax consequences, if any, division of property, including retirement benefits, and allocation of obligations are fair and just and constitute the entire agreement between the parties;
(3) the spousal maintenance and division of property fairly allocate the economic effect of dissolution and take into consideration the factors listed in AS 25.24.160(a)(2) and (4);
(4) each spouse entered into the agreement voluntarily and free from the coercion of another person;
(5) the conditions in AS 25.24.200(a) have been met; and
(6) the written agreements between the spouses concerning ownership or joint ownership of an animal take into consideration the well-being of the animal.
(b) If the petition is filed under AS 25.24.200(a) and is subject to AS 25.24.220(h), the court may grant the spouses a final decree of dissolution and shall order other relief as provided in this section if the court, upon consideration of the information contained in the petition and the testimony of the spouse or spouses at the hearing, finds that
(1) the spouses understand fully the nature and consequences of their action;
(2) the written agreements between the spouses concerning child custody, child support, and visitation are in the best interest of the children of the marriage, constitute the entire agreement of the parties on child custody, child support, and visitation and, as between the spouses, are just;
(3) the written agreements between the spouses concerning spousal maintenance and tax consequences, if any, division of property, including retirement benefits, and allocation of obligations are just and constitute the entire agreement between the parties;
(4) the spousal maintenance and division of property fairly allocate the economic effect of dissolution and take into consideration the factors listed in AS 25.24.160(a)(2) and (4);
(5) each spouse entered the agreement voluntarily and free from the coercion of another person; and
(6) the conditions in AS 25.24.200(a) have been met.
(c) If the petition is filed by one spouse under AS 25.24.200(b), the court may grant the spouse a final decree of dissolution and change the petitioner's name, if so requested, if the court, upon consideration of affidavits supplied by the spouse and the testimony of the spouse at the hearing, finds that
(1) the spouse present at the hearing understands fully the nature and consequences of the action;
(2) the conditions in AS 25.24.200(b) have been met; and
(3) the requirements of AS 25.24.165(b) have been satisfied, if a change of name is requested.
(d) The court shall dismiss a petition or continue action on a petition filed under AS 25.24.200 — 25.24.260 before findings are made if
(1) a representative of the unmarried children who are under the age of 19 objects to a term of an agreement between the spouses;
(2) either of the spouses withdraws from an agreement required under AS 25.24.200(a); or
(3) the petition alleges that the conditions in AS 25.24.200(b) exist, but the whereabouts of the absent spouse becomes known to the other spouse or the court before findings are made.
(e) The court shall deny the relief sought in a petition filed under AS 25.24.200 — 25.24.260 if the court does not make the findings required under (a) — (c) of this section.
(f) If the petition is filed by both spouses under AS 25.24.200(a), the court shall change either spouse's name, if the spouse seeking a change of name to a name other than a prior name complies with AS 25.24.165(b), and shall fully and specifically set out in the decree the written agreements of the spouses and shall order the performance of those written agreements. The court shall also state, in the decree, whether child support payments are to be made through the child support services agency. If the petition is filed by one spouse under AS 25.24.200(b), the decree must state that it does not bar future action on the issues not resolved in the decree.
(g) Notwithstanding other provisions of AS 25.24.200 — 25.24.260, the court may not award to one spouse real or personal property acquired by the other spouse before the date of the marriage, unless the spouses expressly agree otherwise or the court determines that the property should be made available, by sale or other conveyance, to ensure that the best interests of the children are provided for. If the court determines that the best interests of the children require an award of premarital property, but the spouses do not agree, the court shall dismiss or continue the action.
(h) If a judgment under this section distributes benefits to an alternate payee under AS 14.25, AS 21.51.120(a), AS 21.54.020(c), 21.54.050(c), AS 22.25, AS 26.05.222 — 26.05.226, or AS 39.35, the judgment must meet the requirements of a qualified domestic relations order under the definition of that phrase that is applicable to those provisions.
(i) For each judgment issued under this section, the court shall include in the records relating to the matter the social security numbers, if ascertainable, of the following persons:
(1) each party to the dissolution of marriage;
(2) each child whose rights are addressed in the judgment.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1989–2023 · leading case: McCarter v. McCarter, 303 P.3d 509 (Alaska 2013).
McCarter v. McCarter, 303 P.3d 509 (Alaska 2013). “14 In short, the factual findings required by AS 25.24.230, while nee-essary to the issuance of the final decree, are irrelevant to its enforcement in a subsequent proceeding.”
Musser v. Johnson, 914 P.2d 1241 (Alaska 1996). “" Under AS 25.24.230(a), the superior court did not err in refusing to enforce the Agreement.”
Keffer v. Keffer, 852 P.2d 394 (Alaska 1993). “At the dissolution hearing, the superior court determines whether the written agreements relating to property division, spousal maintenance and the allocation of obligations are just and fair.”
Lowe v. Lowe, 817 P.2d 453 (Alaska 1991). “We vacated the property division portion of the dissolution petition because the moving party did not "understand fully the nature and consequences of [her] action” as required by AS 25.24.230(a)(1). Id. at 1054 . 12 . Linda’s admission that she had discussed Tommy’s retirement…”
Heber v. Heber, 330 P.3d 926 (Alaska 2014). “220(h) (requiring the superior court to view dissolution agreements with a "heightened level of scrutiny" if either spouse was charged with a crime involving domestic violence, if either spouse was subject to a domestic violence protective order, or if "there is evidence that a…”
Dewey v. Dewey, 969 P.2d 1154 (Alaska 1999). “220(d)(2) (1983); see also AS 25.24.230(a)(2) (1983). Since the parties stipulated that there were minor children of the marriage, the superior court scrutinized the agreement to ensure that the award of child support was fair and in the children’s best interests.”
Notkin v. Notkin, 921 P.2d 1109 (Alaska 1996). “AS 25.24.230(a) allows a court to grant a final decree of dissolution only after finding that "the spouses understand fully the nature and consequences of their action” and that "the written agreements between the spouses concerning maintenance and tax consequences, if any, divi…”
Crafts v. Morgan, 776 P.2d 1049 (Alaska 1989). “AS 25.24.230(a)(1). 3 The master’s findings do not refer to any evidence which would indicate that either party was aware of Carolina’s right to share in properties listed in Peter’s name.”
Pablo Diaz-Fontao v. Martha Andrade (Alaska 2023). “Morgan, where we vacated a property division given one spouse’s lack of understanding of the terms of the parties’ dissolution.11 Despite some parallels, though, Crafts is not dispositive here.”
Jason Walrath v. Bobbi Walrath (Alaska 2019). “The superior court found, following the contract, trial that the parties had neglected to include the agreement in the 1 We review questions of law de novo.”
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.230(a) — 3 cases
Musser v. Johnson, 914 P.2d 1241 (Alaska 1996). “" Under AS 25.24.230(a), the superior court did not err in refusing to enforce the Agreement.”
McCarter v. McCarter, 303 P.3d 509 (Alaska 2013). “14 In short, the factual findings required by AS 25.24.230, while nee-essary to the issuance of the final decree, are irrelevant to its enforcement in a subsequent proceeding.”
Notkin v. Notkin, 921 P.2d 1109 (Alaska 1996). “AS 25.24.230(a) allows a court to grant a final decree of dissolution only after finding that "the spouses understand fully the nature and consequences of their action” and that "the written agreements between the spouses concerning maintenance and tax consequences, if any, divi…”
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.230(a)(1) — 4 cases
Lowe v. Lowe, 817 P.2d 453 (Alaska 1991). “We vacated the property division portion of the dissolution petition because the moving party did not "understand fully the nature and consequences of [her] action” as required by AS 25.24.230(a)(1). Id. at 1054 . 12 . Linda’s admission that she had discussed Tommy’s retirement…”
Musser v. Johnson, 914 P.2d 1241 (Alaska 1996). “" Under AS 25.24.230(a), the superior court did not err in refusing to enforce the Agreement.”
McCarter v. McCarter, 303 P.3d 509 (Alaska 2013). “14 In short, the factual findings required by AS 25.24.230, while nee-essary to the issuance of the final decree, are irrelevant to its enforcement in a subsequent proceeding.”
Crafts v. Morgan, 776 P.2d 1049 (Alaska 1989). “AS 25.24.230(a)(1). 3 The master’s findings do not refer to any evidence which would indicate that either party was aware of Carolina’s right to share in properties listed in Peter’s name.”
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.230(a)(2) — 3 cases
Dewey v. Dewey, 969 P.2d 1154 (Alaska 1999). “220(d)(2) (1983); see also AS 25.24.230(a)(2) (1983). Since the parties stipulated that there were minor children of the marriage, the superior court scrutinized the agreement to ensure that the award of child support was fair and in the children’s best interests.”
Crafts v. Morgan, 776 P.2d 1049 (Alaska 1989). “AS 25.24.230(a)(1). 3 The master’s findings do not refer to any evidence which would indicate that either party was aware of Carolina’s right to share in properties listed in Peter’s name.”
Jason Walrath v. Bobbi Walrath (Alaska 2019). “The superior court found, following the contract, trial that the parties had neglected to include the agreement in the 1 We review questions of law de novo.”
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.230(b) — 1 case
Heber v. Heber, 330 P.3d 926 (Alaska 2014). “220(h) (requiring the superior court to view dissolution agreements with a "heightened level of scrutiny" if either spouse was charged with a crime involving domestic violence, if either spouse was subject to a domestic violence protective order, or if "there is evidence that a…”
— Alaska Stat. § 25.24.230(b)(1) — 1 case
Pablo Diaz-Fontao v. Martha Andrade (Alaska 2023). “Morgan, where we vacated a property division given one spouse’s lack of understanding of the terms of the parties’ dissolution.11 Despite some parallels, though, Crafts is not dispositive here.”
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.