14 Alaska opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2025 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Alaska courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Yako William Collins v. State of Alaskagreen1 sentence2025Summarizing its analytical framework, the court concluded that the presumption “that any new statute constitutes a change in the law rather than a clarification of pre-existing law . . . can be rebutted by the wording and legislative history of the new statute, by the context in which the [more recent] legislature acted,” and also “by whether the wording of the new statute is consistent with a reasonable interpretation of the pre-existing statute.” Collins II, 494 P.3d at 69 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
Evitt-Thorne v. Hiatt (In re Evitt)green1 sentence2023Rather, it is apparent that from the time of the settlement agreement . . . decedent was obligated [to fulfill his contract obligations].”53 Estate of Evitt v. Hiatt also concerned a divorce settlement agreement executed years before death but not enforceable until after death. 54 The Arizona Court of Appeals, applying Arizona’s probate code, 55 held “that when a person enters into a contract obligating him to act while living to ensure a payment to the claimant at or after his death, a claim for breach arises before the decedent’s death.” 56 And Ader v. 50 668 N.W.2d at 920-21 . 51 Id. at 923 | 1 | 1 |
McAlpine v. PACARROgreen1 sentence2023It then considered whether to apply the statutory presumption against awarding custody to a parent who had engaged in domestic violence.3 The court concluded the presumption against awarding custody applied to both MaryBeth and Troy and that neither had rebutted the 1 Bagby v. Bagby, 250 P.3d 1127, 1128-29 (Alaska 2011) (affirming that custodial parent’s move out of state amounts to substantial change in circumstances “as a matter of law”) (quoting Barrett v. Alguire, 35 P.3d 1, 6 (Alaska 2001)). 2 McAlpine v. Pacarro, 262 P.3d 622, 626-27 (Alaska 2011) (holding that court was permitted to con | 1 | 1 |
Estate of Hadawaygreen2 sentences2023Rather, it is apparent that from the time of the settlement agreement . . . decedent was obligated [to fulfill his contract obligations].”53 Estate of Evitt v. Hiatt also concerned a divorce settlement agreement executed years before death but not enforceable until after death. 54 The Arizona Court of Appeals, applying Arizona’s probate code, 55 held “that when a person enters into a contract obligating him to act while living to ensure a payment to the claimant at or after his death, a claim for breach arises before the decedent’s death.” 56 And Ader v. 50 668 N.W.2d at 920-21 . 51 Id. at 923 2023Rather, it is apparent that from the time of the settlement agreement . . . decedent was obligated [to fulfill his contract obligations].”53 Estate of Evitt v. Hiatt also concerned a divorce settlement agreement executed years before death but not enforceable until after death. 54 The Arizona Court of Appeals, applying Arizona’s probate code, 55 held “that when a person enters into a contract obligating him to act while living to ensure a payment to the claimant at or after his death, a claim for breach arises before the decedent’s death.” 56 And Ader v. 50 668 N.W.2d at 920-21 . 51 Id. at 923 | 1 | 1 |
Barrett v. Alguiregreen1 sentence2023It then considered whether to apply the statutory presumption against awarding custody to a parent who had engaged in domestic violence.3 The court concluded the presumption against awarding custody applied to both MaryBeth and Troy and that neither had rebutted the 1 Bagby v. Bagby, 250 P.3d 1127, 1128-29 (Alaska 2011) (affirming that custodial parent’s move out of state amounts to substantial change in circumstances “as a matter of law”) (quoting Barrett v. Alguire, 35 P.3d 1, 6 (Alaska 2001)). 2 McAlpine v. Pacarro, 262 P.3d 622, 626-27 (Alaska 2011) (holding that court was permitted to con | 1 | 1 |
Bagby v. Bagbygreen1 sentence2023It then considered whether to apply the statutory presumption against awarding custody to a parent who had engaged in domestic violence.3 The court concluded the presumption against awarding custody applied to both MaryBeth and Troy and that neither had rebutted the 1 Bagby v. Bagby, 250 P.3d 1127, 1128-29 (Alaska 2011) (affirming that custodial parent’s move out of state amounts to substantial change in circumstances “as a matter of law”) (quoting Barrett v. Alguire, 35 P.3d 1, 6 (Alaska 2001)). 2 McAlpine v. Pacarro, 262 P.3d 622, 626-27 (Alaska 2011) (holding that court was permitted to con | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alaska. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
MRS v. State
green
2 sentences1995Id. at 838-41 . 1995Id. at 838-41 . | 2 | 1995–1995 |
Donohue v. Copiague Union Free School District
green
2 sentences1981Id. 418 N.Y.S.2d at 378 , 391 N.E.2d at 1354 . 1981Id. 418 N.Y.S.2d at 378 , 391 N.E.2d at 1354 . | 2 | 1981–1981 |
Rugamas v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of Clark
green
2 sentences2021Stat. § 172.135 (2) (pre-2015 version). 36 Rugamas, 305 P.3d at 891 . 37 Id. at 894 . 38 Id. at 895 . – 14 – 2698 hearsay exception, the court concluded that the exception did not apply to grand jury proceedings.39 We reach a similar conclusion here. 2021Stat. § 172.135 (2) (pre-2015 version). 36 Rugamas, 305 P.3d at 891 . 37 Id. at 894 . 38 Id. at 895 . – 14 – 2698 hearsay exception, the court concluded that the exception did not apply to grand jury proceedings.39 We reach a similar conclusion here. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Sierra
green
1 sentence2019V.; Alaska Const. art. 1, § 9. 58 Sierra, 568 A.2d at 456 (quoting C. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Cox v. State
green
1 sentence1997Id. at 300-01 . | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Jessica K. Hashimoto v. Bank of Hawaii
green
1 sentence1994Id. at 411-412 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
State v. Baker
green
1 sentence1994Id. at 898 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Gunnerud v. State
green
2 sentences1983On appeal, the supreme court found that Gunnerud's constitutional rights to counsel and to remain silent were violated when the jury was allowed to hear her assertion of these rights; finding the evidence against Gunnerud to be strong but not overwhelming, the court concluded that the error was not harmless beyond reasonable doubt. 611 P.2d at 76 . 1983On appeal, the supreme court found that Gunnerud’s constitutional rights to counsel and to remain silent were violated when the jury was allowed to hear her assertion of these fights; finding the evidence against Gunne-rud to be strong but not overwhelming, the court concluded that the error was not harmless beyond reasonable doubt. 611 P.2d at 76 . | 1 | 1983–1983 |
United States v. Seckinger
green
2 sentences1981The Court concluded that the clause required the contractor to indemnify the government when (1) the contractor was solely negligent, or (2) the contractor and the government were concurrently negligent, but only to the extent of the contractor’s share of such joint negligence. 397 U.S. at 212-16 , 90 S.Ct. at 885-887 , 25 L.Ed.2d at 233-35 . 1981The Court concluded that the clause required the contractor to indemnify the government when (1) the contractor was solely negligent, or (2) the contractor and the government were concurrently negligent, but only to the extent of the contractor’s share of such joint negligence. 397 U.S. at 212-16 , 90 S.Ct. at 885-887 , 25 L.Ed.2d at 233-35 . | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.