Alaska Statutes

Alaska Stat. § 40.25.122 (2026)

Litigation disclosure

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AK-LEGakleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 40.25.122. Litigation disclosure.
A public record that is subject to disclosure and copying under AS 40.25.110 — 40.25.120 remains a public record subject to disclosure and copying even if the record is used for, included in, or relevant to litigation, including law enforcement proceedings, involving a public agency, except that with respect to a person involved in litigation, the records sought shall be disclosed in accordance with the rules of procedure applicable in a court or an administrative adjudication. In this section, “involved in litigation” means a party to litigation or representing a party to litigation, including obtaining public records for the party.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2009–2020 · leading case: Basey v. State, Dep't of Pub. Saf., Div. of Alaska State Troopers, Bureau of Investigations, 408 P.3d 1173 (Alaska 2017).
Basey v. State, Dep't of Pub. Saf., Div. of Alaska State Troopers, Bureau of Investigations, 408 P.3d 1173 (Alaska 2017). · cites it 25× “The denial letter stated that the requested records “pertain to a matter that is currently the subject of civil and/or criminal litigation to which [Basey is] a party” and that pursuant to AS 40.25.122 the records “continue to be unavailable through [a public records request]…”
Kaleb Lee Basey v. State of Alaska, Dep't of Pub. Saf., Div. of State Troopers, Bureau of Investigations, 462 P.3d 529 (Alaska 2020). · cites it 5× “4 See AS 40.25.122 (providing exception for disclosure of public records (continued.”
Copeland v. Ballard, 210 P.3d 1197 (Alaska 2009). · cites it 3× “AS 40.25.122. 29 . Id. This provision implies that the agency must develop regulations to govern access to the record by the litigating parties.”
Alaska Cmty. Action on Toxics v. Hartig, 321 P.3d 360 (Alaska 2014). · cites it 2× “administrative law judge's earlier decision regarding the costs of the administrative record, deciding that the Department had not acted arbitrarily in compiling the record; had not violated ACAT's and Alaska Survival's due process rights by demanding that they pay the costs;…”
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.