Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 25.25.604 (2026)
Choice of law
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 25.25.604. Choice of law.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in (d) of this section, the law of the issuing state or foreign country governs
(1) the nature, extent, amount, and duration of current payments under a registered support order;
(2) the computation and payment of arrearages and accrual of interest on the arrearages under the support order; and
(3) the existence and satisfaction of other obligations under the support order.
(b) In a proceeding for arrears under a registered support order, the statute of limitation of this state or of the issuing state or foreign country, whichever is longer, applies.
(c) A responding tribunal of this state shall apply the procedures and remedies of this state to enforce current support and collect arrears and interest due on a support order of another state or a foreign country registered in this state.
(d) After a tribunal of this state or another state determines which is the controlling order and issues an order consolidating arrears, if any, a tribunal of this state shall prospectively apply the law of the state or foreign country issuing the controlling order, including its law on interest on arrears, on current and future support, and on consolidated arrears.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in (d) of this section, the law of the issuing state or foreign country governs
(1) the nature, extent, amount, and duration of current payments under a registered support order;
(2) the computation and payment of arrearages and accrual of interest on the arrearages under the support order; and
(3) the existence and satisfaction of other obligations under the support order.
(b) In a proceeding for arrears under a registered support order, the statute of limitation of this state or of the issuing state or foreign country, whichever is longer, applies.
(c) A responding tribunal of this state shall apply the procedures and remedies of this state to enforce current support and collect arrears and interest due on a support order of another state or a foreign country registered in this state.
(d) After a tribunal of this state or another state determines which is the controlling order and issues an order consolidating arrears, if any, a tribunal of this state shall prospectively apply the law of the state or foreign country issuing the controlling order, including its law on interest on arrears, on current and future support, and on consolidated arrears.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1998–2017 · leading case: State, Child Support Enf't Div. v. Bromley, 987 P.2d 183 (Alaska 1999).
State, Child Support Enf't Div. v. Bromley, 987 P.2d 183 (Alaska 1999). “We also consider AS 25.25.604, 35 UIFSA’s choice of law provision, which “identifies situations in which local law is inapplicable.”
Hussein-Scott v. Scott, 298 P.3d 179 (Alaska 2013). “AS 25.25.604(a) ("The law of the issuing state governs the nature, extent, amount, and duration of current payments and other obligations of support and the payment of arrearages under the order.”
State, Dep't of Revenue, Child Support Enf't Div. Ex Rel. Wallace v. Delaney, 962 P.2d 187 (Alaska 1998). “” AS 25.25.604. Alaska loses exclusive jurisdiction over a child support order only if another state modifies the support order.”
Thomas Brian Barton v. Jessica Joyce Means (Alaska 2017). “opposition” without further written findings, we are unable to review any factual findings regarding the sufficiency of Thomas’s proof that he provided the insurance.”
— Alaska Stat. § 25.25.604(a) — 3 cases
State, Child Support Enf't Div. v. Bromley, 987 P.2d 183 (Alaska 1999). “We also consider AS 25.25.604, 35 UIFSA’s choice of law provision, which “identifies situations in which local law is inapplicable.”
Hussein-Scott v. Scott, 298 P.3d 179 (Alaska 2013). “AS 25.25.604(a) ("The law of the issuing state governs the nature, extent, amount, and duration of current payments and other obligations of support and the payment of arrearages under the order.”
Thomas Brian Barton v. Jessica Joyce Means (Alaska 2017). “opposition” without further written findings, we are unable to review any factual findings regarding the sufficiency of Thomas’s proof that he provided the insurance.”
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.