Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 Alaska opinions name it 2 courts 1972–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Savage Arms, Inc. v. Western Auto Supply Co.green2 sentences2025Auto Supply Co., 18 P.3d 49, 53 (Alaska 2001); Palmer G. 2025Auto Supply Co., 18 P.3d 49, 53 (Alaska 2001); Palmer G. | 1 | 1 |
In Re the Adoption of S.K.L.H.green1 sentence2021See In re Adoption of S.K.L.H., 204 P.3d 320 , 328 & n.41 (Alaska 2009) (“Undue influence is the exercise of sufficient control over (continued...) -29- 7552 validity of a prenuptial agreement, citing our decision in Brooks v. Brooks.48 In Brooks we identified several “standards of ‘fairness’” for prenuptial agreements, including the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act’s rule that a prenuptial agreement must be “voluntarily” entered into.49 We ultimately did not decide in Brooks (nor have we since) 47 (...continued) a person that (1) deprives that person of freedom of choice or overcomes that per | 1 | 1 |
Osborne v. Russellgreen1 sentence1989Finally, an additional and related rule of liability which precludes a finding of superseding cause is that “[w]here the negligent conduct of the actor creates or increases the foreseeable risk of harm through the intervention of another force, and is a substantial factor in causing the harm, such intervention is not a superseding cause.” Osborne v. Russell, 669 P.2d 550, 557 (Alaska 1983) (quoting Restatement § 442A). | 1 | 1 |
People of the Territory of Guam v. Manuel Jose Alvarezgreen2 sentences1989See People v. Alvarez, 763 F.2d 1036, 1037-38 (9th Cir.1985) (indicating that an appellate court may decline to consider an "invited error" even if the error would otherwise qualify as a plain error); United States v. Gray, 626 F.2d 494 , 501 n. 2 (5th Cir.1980) (indicating same), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1091 , 101 S.Ct. 887 , 66 L.Ed.2d 820 (1981). 1989See People v. Alvarez, 763 F.2d 1036, 1037-38 (9th Cir.1985) (indicating that an appellate court may decline to consider an “invited error” even if the error would otherwise qualify as a plain error); United States v. Gray, 626 F.2d 494 , 501 n. 2 (5th Cir.1980) (indicating same), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1091 , 101 S.Ct. 887 , 66 L.Ed.2d 820 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
Hayes v. Quincy (In Re WPMK Corp.)green2 sentences1989Under Hawaii common law, “[w]here the partnership accepts the benefits of the unauthorized acts of its partner, with actual or constructive knowledge of all the material facts, it is deemed to have ratified the act.” In re WPMK Corp., 59 B.R. 991, 997 (D.Hawaii 1986) (citation omitted.) Consistent with Hawaii law is the related principle, recognized by this court in Bruton , that where a principal learns of the transaction but remains silent in circumstances where the principal would normally be expected to repudiate or disaf-firm, the principal may be bound by the doctrine of ratification by 1989Under Hawaii common law, "[w]here the partnership accepts the benefits of the unauthorized acts of its partner, with actual or constructive knowledge of all the material facts, it is deemed to have ratified the act." In re WPMK Corp., 59 B.R. 991, 997 (D.Hawaii 1986) (citation omitted.) Consistent with Hawaii law is the related principle, recognized by this court in Bruton , that where a principal learns of the transaction but remains silent in circumstances where the principal would normally be expected to repudiate or disaffirm, the principal may be bound by the doctrine of ratification by i | 1 | 1 |
Nelson v. Stategreen1 sentence1983See Cleveland v. Municipality of Anchorage, 631 P.2d 1073, 1077-82 (Alaska 1981); Nelson v. State, 597 P.2d 977, 978-80 (Alaska 1979). | 1 | 1 |
Cleveland v. Municipality of Anchoragegreen1 sentence1983See Cleveland v. Municipality of Anchorage, 631 P.2d 1073, 1077-82 (Alaska 1981); Nelson v. State, 597 P.2d 977, 978-80 (Alaska 1979). | 1 | 1 |
Cesar v. Alaska Workmen's Compensation Boardgreen1 sentence1972See Cesar v. Alaska Workmen’s Compensation Board, 383 P.2d 805, 807 (Alaska 1963), where we noted that we would consider federal precedents when a state statute closely resembles a federal statute. 3 . | 1 | 1 |
City of Fairbanks v. Schaiblegreen1 sentence1972In City of Fairbanks v. Schaible, 375 P.2d 201, 206-209 (Alaska 1962), this court refused to give effect to the related doctrine that a municipal corporation could not be held liable in tort for “governmental” as opposed to “proprietary” functions. 2 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alaska. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Nicholson
green
2 sentences1992Id. at 1153-54 . 1992Id. at 1153-54 . | 2 | 1992–1992 |
Pister v. State, Department of Revenue
green
2 sentences2025As other courts have recognized, “alter ego liability and the related doctrine of piercing the corporate veil” generally “do[] not involve consideration of corporate internal affairs,” but rather “the abuse of the corporate form to the detriment of third parties.” 50 Because veil-piercing generally 47 Id. 48 Id. at 364-66 . 49 Savage Arms, Inc. v. W. 2025As other courts have recognized, “alter ego liability and the related doctrine of piercing the corporate veil” generally “do[] not involve consideration of corporate internal affairs,” but rather “the abuse of the corporate form to the detriment of third parties.” 50 Because veil-piercing generally 47 Id. 48 Id. at 364-66 . 49 Savage Arms, Inc. v. W. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
State v. McDonald
green
1 sentence2010In State v. McDonald, 872 P.2d 627 (Alaska App.1994), the defendant was charged with being an accomplice to a murder. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
James v. State
green
1 sentence1993In James v. State, 815 P.2d 352 , 355 n. 9 (Alaska 1991), we commented upon the difference between the doctrines of promissory and equitable estoppel, stating: Both parties cite precedents discussing not only promissory estoppel but also the related doctrine of equitable estoppel. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
United States v. Billy W. Gray, Lee Andrew Fennell, Roger Lee Wright, Ronald Cecil Barker and Vance C. Dyar
green
2 sentences1989See People v. Alvarez, 763 F.2d 1036, 1037-38 (9th Cir.1985) (indicating that an appellate court may decline to consider an "invited error" even if the error would otherwise qualify as a plain error); United States v. Gray, 626 F.2d 494 , 501 n. 2 (5th Cir.1980) (indicating same), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1091 , 101 S.Ct. 887 , 66 L.Ed.2d 820 (1981). 1989See People v. Alvarez, 763 F.2d 1036, 1037-38 (9th Cir.1985) (indicating that an appellate court may decline to consider an “invited error” even if the error would otherwise qualify as a plain error); United States v. Gray, 626 F.2d 494 , 501 n. 2 (5th Cir.1980) (indicating same), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1091 , 101 S.Ct. 887 , 66 L.Ed.2d 820 (1981). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Johnson v. United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
green
2 sentences1989See People v. Alvarez, 763 F.2d 1036, 1037-38 (9th Cir.1985) (indicating that an appellate court may decline to consider an "invited error" even if the error would otherwise qualify as a plain error); United States v. Gray, 626 F.2d 494 , 501 n. 2 (5th Cir.1980) (indicating same), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1091 , 101 S.Ct. 887 , 66 L.Ed.2d 820 (1981). 1989See People v. Alvarez, 763 F.2d 1036, 1037-38 (9th Cir.1985) (indicating that an appellate court may decline to consider an “invited error” even if the error would otherwise qualify as a plain error); United States v. Gray, 626 F.2d 494 , 501 n. 2 (5th Cir.1980) (indicating same), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1091 , 101 S.Ct. 887 , 66 L.Ed.2d 820 (1981). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Ford v. Bordenkircher
green
2 sentences1989See People v. Alvarez, 763 F.2d 1036, 1037-38 (9th Cir.1985) (indicating that an appellate court may decline to consider an "invited error" even if the error would otherwise qualify as a plain error); United States v. Gray, 626 F.2d 494 , 501 n. 2 (5th Cir.1980) (indicating same), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1091 , 101 S.Ct. 887 , 66 L.Ed.2d 820 (1981). 1989See People v. Alvarez, 763 F.2d 1036, 1037-38 (9th Cir.1985) (indicating that an appellate court may decline to consider an “invited error” even if the error would otherwise qualify as a plain error); United States v. Gray, 626 F.2d 494 , 501 n. 2 (5th Cir.1980) (indicating same), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1091 , 101 S.Ct. 887 , 66 L.Ed.2d 820 (1981). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Roberts v. United States
green
2 sentences1989See People v. Alvarez, 763 F.2d 1036, 1037-38 (9th Cir.1985) (indicating that an appellate court may decline to consider an "invited error" even if the error would otherwise qualify as a plain error); United States v. Gray, 626 F.2d 494 , 501 n. 2 (5th Cir.1980) (indicating same), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1091 , 101 S.Ct. 887 , 66 L.Ed.2d 820 (1981). 1989See People v. Alvarez, 763 F.2d 1036, 1037-38 (9th Cir.1985) (indicating that an appellate court may decline to consider an “invited error” even if the error would otherwise qualify as a plain error); United States v. Gray, 626 F.2d 494 , 501 n. 2 (5th Cir.1980) (indicating same), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1091 , 101 S.Ct. 887 , 66 L.Ed.2d 820 (1981). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Bruton v. Automatic Welding & Supply Corporation
green
2 sentences1989Bruton, 513 P.2d at 1127-28 . 1989Bruton, 513 P.2d at 1127-28 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.