Alaska Statutes

Alaska Stat. § 25.30.860 (2026)

Communication between courts

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AK-LEGakleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 25.30.860. Communication between courts.
 (a) A court of this state may communicate with a court in another state concerning a proceeding arising under this chapter.

 (b) The court may allow the parties to participate in the communication. If the parties are not able to participate in the communication, they shall be given the opportunity to present facts and legal arguments before a decision on jurisdiction is made.

 (c) Communication between courts on schedules, calendars, court records, and similar matters may occur without informing the parties, and a record need not be made of the communication.

 (d) Except as provided in (c) of this section, a record shall be made of a communication under this section. The parties must be informed promptly of the communication and granted access to the record.

 (e) In this section, “record” means information that is inscribed on a tangible medium or that is stored in an electronic or other medium and is retrievable in perceivable form.




Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2001–2001 · leading case: John v. Baker, 30 P.3d 68 (Alaska 2001).
John v. Baker, 30 P.3d 68 (Alaska 2001). · cites it 2× “300(a)(3) (under Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, Alaska courts may only exercise jurisdiction if a court of the child's home state declines jurisdiction because it recognizes Alaska as more appropriate forum); AS 25.30.860(a) (authorizing state courts to…”
Alaska Stat. § 25.30.860(a): 1 case
John v. Baker, 30 P.3d 68 (Alaska 2001). “300(a)(3) (under Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act, Alaska courts may only exercise jurisdiction if a court of the child's home state declines jurisdiction because it recognizes Alaska as more appropriate forum); AS 25.30.860(a) (authorizing state courts to…”
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.