pleading claim in Alaska

2002If, on a motion asserting the defense numbered (6) to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56. [2] E.g., Kollodge v. State, 757 P.2d 1024, 1026 (Alaska 1988); Reed v. Municipality of Anchorage, 741 P.2d 1181, 1184 (Alaska 1987); Knight v. American Guard & Ale

2002If, on a motion asserting the defense numbered (6) to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56. , E.g., Kollodge v. State, 757 P.2d 1024, 1026 (Alaska 1988); Reed v. Municipality of Anchorage, 741 P.2d 1181, 1184 (Alaska 1987); Knight v. American Guard & Alert

2018In Adams, we concluded that if an error-free trial “could validate an otherwise invalid indictment, the right to indictment by a grand jury would become a nullity and the grand jury would cease to operate as a check upon the district attorney’s power to initiate prosecution.”16 But this conclusion ignored the defendant’s right to file a pretrial motion to dismiss an indictment based on the grand jury presentation, and the trial court’s obligation to grant such a motion if the indictment is not properly supported.17 If the trial court improperly denies such a motion, then the defendant is entit

2018App. 1961); State v. Bridges, 412 S.W.2d 455 (Mo. 1967); State v. Nolan, 418 S.W.2d 51 (Mo. 1967); State v. Sossamon, 130 S.E.2d 638 (N.C. 1963)). 14 See Fain, 173 N.E.2d at 825 ; Bridges, 412 S.W.2d at 457 ; Nolan, 418 S.W.2d at 55 ; Sossamon, 130 S.E.2d at 640 . 15 See, e.g., Alto v. State, 565 P.2d 492, 495 (Alaska 1977) (“Nothing is more (continued...) -42- 7222 mistakenly relied on these cases involving a pleading error to reverse an evidentiary error that easily could be corrected at trial.

2018In Adams, we concluded that if an error-free trial “could validate an otherwise invalid indictment, the right to indictment by a grand jury would become a nullity and the grand jury would cease to operate as a check upon the district attorney’s power to initiate prosecution.”16 But this conclusion ignored the defendant’s right to file a pretrial motion to dismiss an indictment based on the grand jury presentation, and the trial court’s obligation to grant such a motion if the indictment is not properly supported.17 If the trial court improperly denies such a motion, then the defendant is entit

2016See Beard v. Baum, 796 P.2d 1344, 1350 (Alaska 1990) (requiring a higher pleading standard *521 for claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress). 99 .

2016See DeNardo v. Bax, 147 P.3d 672, 678 (Alaska 2006). 100 .

2016Christianson v. Conrad-Houston Ins., 318 P.3d 390, 396 (Alaska 2014) (citing Williams v. Williams, 129 P.3d 428, 431 (Alaska 2006)). 8 .

2016Christianson v. Conrad-Houston Ins., 318 P.3d 390, 396 (Alaska 2014) (citing Williams v. Williams, 129 P.3d 428, 431 (Alaska 2006)). 8 .

2012See Kaiser, 108 P.3d at 879 (quoting Reed v. Municipality of Anchorage, 741 P.2d 1181, 1184 (Alaska 1987)); see also Phillips v. Gieringer, 108 P.3d 889, 892-93 (Alaska 2005) (electing to review a motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment).

2012P. 12(b) ("If, on a motion ... to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56."); see also Kaiser, 108 P.3d at 879 . .

2012See Kaiser, 108 P.3d at 879 (quoting Reed v. Municipality of Anchorage, 741 P.2d 1181, 1184 (Alaska 1987)); see also Phillips v. Gieringer, 108 P.3d 889, 892-93 (Alaska 2005) (electing to review a motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment).

2002If, on a motion asserting the defense numbered (6) to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56. [2] E.g., Kollodge v. State, 757 P.2d 1024, 1026 (Alaska 1988); Reed v. Municipality of Anchorage, 741 P.2d 1181, 1184 (Alaska 1987); Knight v. American Guard & Ale

2002If, on a motion asserting the defense numbered (6) to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56. [2] E.g., Kollodge v. State, 757 P.2d 1024, 1026 (Alaska 1988); Reed v. Municipality of Anchorage, 741 P.2d 1181, 1184 (Alaska 1987); Knight v. American Guard & Ale

2002If, on a motion asserting the defense numbered (6) to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56. [2] E.g., Kollodge v. State, 757 P.2d 1024, 1026 (Alaska 1988); Reed v. Municipality of Anchorage, 741 P.2d 1181, 1184 (Alaska 1987); Knight v. American Guard & Ale

2002If, on a motion asserting the defense numbered (6) to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56. [2] E.g., Kollodge v. State, 757 P.2d 1024, 1026 (Alaska 1988); Reed v. Municipality of Anchorage, 741 P.2d 1181, 1184 (Alaska 1987); Knight v. American Guard & Ale

1994Drake v. Hosley, 713 P.2d 1203, 1205 (Alaska 1986). 6 .

1980See Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co., 358 U.S. 354 , 357 n.4, 79 S.Ct. 468 , 472 n.4, 3 L.Ed.2d 368 , 374 n.4, reh. denied, 359 U.S. 962 , 79 S.Ct. 795 , 3 L.Ed.2d 769 (1959); S & S Logging Co. v. Barker, 366 F.2d 617, 623 (9th Cir. 1966); 5 C.

1980See Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co., 358 U.S. 354 , 357 n.4, 79 S.Ct. 468 , 472 n.4, 3 L.Ed.2d 368 , 374 n.4, reh. denied, 359 U.S. 962 , 79 S.Ct. 795 , 3 L.Ed.2d 769 (1959); S & S Logging Co. v. Barker, 366 F.2d 617, 623 (9th Cir. 1966); 5 C.

1980See Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co., 358 U.S. 354 , 357 n.4, 79 S.Ct. 468 , 472 n.4, 3 L.Ed.2d 368 , 374 n.4, reh. denied, 359 U.S. 962 , 79 S.Ct. 795 , 3 L.Ed.2d 769 (1959); S & S Logging Co. v. Barker, 366 F.2d 617, 623 (9th Cir. 1966); 5 C.

1980See Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co., 358 U.S. 354 , 357 n.4, 79 S.Ct. 468 , 472 n.4, 3 L.Ed.2d 368 , 374 n.4, reh. denied, 359 U.S. 962 , 79 S.Ct. 795 , 3 L.Ed.2d 769 (1959); S & S Logging Co. v. Barker, 366 F.2d 617, 623 (9th Cir. 1966); 5 C.

1980See Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co., 358 U.S. 354 , 357 n.4, 79 S.Ct. 468 , 472 n.4, 3 L.Ed.2d 368 , 374 n.4, reh. denied, 359 U.S. 962 , 79 S.Ct. 795 , 3 L.Ed.2d 769 (1959); S & S Logging Co. v. Barker, 366 F.2d 617, 623 (9th Cir. 1966); 5 C.

1976The commissioner shall issue the certificate or a duplicate for a fee of 25 cents. [15] Satisfaction of the corporate statutory requirements is a condition precedent to a corporation's right and standing to maintain suit. [16] AS 09.10.050 provides a six year statute of limitations on all contract claims. [17] Rule 12(a), Rules of Civil Procedure, provides in part: The state or an officer or agency thereof shall serve an answer to the complaint or to a cross-claim, or a reply to a counterclaim, within 40 days after the service upon the attorney general or the pleading in which the claim is ass

1976In Groseth v. Ness, 421 P.2d 624, 630 (Alaska 1966) we stated: We are of the opinion that the doctrine of equitable estoppel as a prohibition against unjust reliance upon a statute of limitations is a salutary one and therefore adopt the rule for this jurisdiction, (footnote omitted) .

1968In the case at bar matters outside the scope of the pleadings were not considered by the court and therefore, the above-quoted portion of Civ.R. 12(b) (6) is inapplicable. 10 . 71 Kan. 158 , 80 P. 49, 50 (1905). 11 .

1968In the case at bar matters outside the scope of the pleadings were not considered by the court and therefore, the above-quoted portion of Civ.R. 12(b) (6) is inapplicable. 10 . 71 Kan. 158 , 80 P. 49, 50 (1905). 11 .

1968In Shannon v. City of Anchorage, 429 P.2d 17, 20 (Alaska 1967), the concurring opinion alluded to Civ.R. 12(b) which provides: If, on a motion asserting the defense numbered (6) to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all the parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56.

1962Ring v. Spina, 148 F.2d 647, 653 (2d Cir.1945); United States v. St.