non-constitutional claim in Alaska

2025Duvall labels this a “pro rata” approach — i.e., awarding “a percentage of attorney’s fees based on the ratio of full-fee claims to other claims” — an approach we disapproved in Manning. 180 The superior court in Manning had awarded the prevailing defendants “attorney’s fees for 50% of work for which the nature of the claims involved was not identified” based on the court’s “conclusion that 15 of Manning’s 30 counts involved 178 See Manning v. State, Dep’t of Fish & Game, 355 P.3d 530, 540 (Alaska 2015) (“On remand, the superior court should not award attorney’s fees for work on a procedural i

2025Duvall labels this a “pro rata” approach — i.e., awarding “a percentage of attorney’s fees based on the ratio of full-fee claims to other claims” — an approach we disapproved in Manning. 180 The superior court in Manning had awarded the prevailing defendants “attorney’s fees for 50% of work for which the nature of the claims involved was not identified” based on the court’s “conclusion that 15 of Manning’s 30 counts involved 178 See Manning v. State, Dep’t of Fish & Game, 355 P.3d 530, 540 (Alaska 2015) (“On remand, the superior court should not award attorney’s fees for work on a procedural i

2025Duvall labels this a “pro rata” approach — i.e., awarding “a percentage of attorney’s fees based on the ratio of full-fee claims to other claims” — an approach we disapproved in Manning. 180 The superior court in Manning had awarded the prevailing defendants “attorney’s fees for 50% of work for which the nature of the claims involved was not identified” based on the court’s “conclusion that 15 of Manning’s 30 counts involved 178 See Manning v. State, Dep’t of Fish & Game, 355 P.3d 530, 540 (Alaska 2015) (“On remand, the superior court should not award attorney’s fees for work on a procedural i

2023See, e.g., Manning v. State, Dept. of Fish & Game, 355 P.3d 530, 540 (Alaska 2015) (holding that under statute precluding award of attorney’s fees incurred in defense of non-frivolous constitutional claims, superior court could not award attorney’s fees incurred on procedural issues absent documentation that procedural issue was “related solely to a non-constitutional claim”); see also Meyer v. Stand for Salmon, 450 P.3d 689, 691 (Alaska 2019) (Winfree, J., concurring) (explaining that constitutional claimants are entitled under AS 09.60.010 “to recover attorney’s fees devoted in any reasonabl

2005Wyatt v. State, 981 P.2d 109, 115 (Alaska 1999) ("A non-constitutional error is harmless if it did not ‘appreciably affect the jury's verdict.' ") (quoting Love v. State, 457 P.2d 622, 631-32 (Alaska 1969)). 29 .

1984Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U.S. 750, 764-65 , 66 S.Ct. 1239, 1247-48 , 90 L.Ed. 1557 (1946); Love v. State, 457 P.2d 622, 630-32 (Alaska 1969). .

2025Duvall labels this a “pro rata” approach — i.e., awarding “a percentage of attorney’s fees based on the ratio of full-fee claims to other claims” — an approach we disapproved in Manning. 180 The superior court in Manning had awarded the prevailing defendants “attorney’s fees for 50% of work for which the nature of the claims involved was not identified” based on the court’s “conclusion that 15 of Manning’s 30 counts involved 178 See Manning v. State, Dep’t of Fish & Game, 355 P.3d 530, 540 (Alaska 2015) (“On remand, the superior court should not award attorney’s fees for work on a procedural i

2023We have clarified that “Rule 82 attorney fees may be awarded only for work that would not have been necessary but for a non-constitutional claim.” Lake & Peninsula Borough Assembly v. Oberlatz, 329 P.3d 214, 228 (Alaska 2014).

2023We have clarified that “Rule 82 attorney fees may be awarded only for work that would not have been necessary but for a non-constitutional claim.” Lake & Peninsula Borough Assembly v. Oberlatz, 329 P.3d 214, 228 (Alaska 2014).

2023See, e.g., Manning v. State, Dept. of Fish & Game, 355 P.3d 530, 540 (Alaska 2015) (holding that under statute precluding award of attorney’s fees incurred in defense of non-frivolous constitutional claims, superior court could not award attorney’s fees incurred on procedural issues absent documentation that procedural issue was “related solely to a non-constitutional claim”); see also Meyer v. Stand for Salmon, 450 P.3d 689, 691 (Alaska 2019) (Winfree, J., concurring) (explaining that constitutional claimants are entitled under AS 09.60.010 “to recover attorney’s fees devoted in any reasonabl

2005Wyatt v. State, 981 P.2d 109, 115 (Alaska 1999) ("A non-constitutional error is harmless if it did not ‘appreciably affect the jury's verdict.' ") (quoting Love v. State, 457 P.2d 622, 631-32 (Alaska 1969)). 29 .

1972Finally, at least one scholar has argued that under a non-constitutional analysis, school boards lack legitimate "power to dictate the length of boys' hair." Goldstein, The Scope and Sources of School Board Authority to Regulate Student Conduct and Status: A Non-constitutional Analysis, 117 U.Pa.L.Rev. 373, 400, 422 (1969). [27] 448 F.2d 258 (10th Cir.1971). [28] Id. at 261. [29] Compare the following language of the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment, which provides: [N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.... and the due

1972Finally, at least one scholar has argued that under a non-constitutional analysis, school boards lack legitimate "power to dictate the length of boys' hair." Goldstein, The Scope and Sources of School Board Authority to Regulate Student Conduct and Status: A Non-constitutional Analysis, 117 U.Pa.L.Rev. 373, 400, 422 (1969). [27] 448 F.2d 258 (10th Cir.1971). [28] Id. at 261. [29] Compare the following language of the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment, which provides: [N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.... and the due

1972Finally, at least one scholar has argued that under a non-constitutional analysis, school boards lack legitimate "power to dictate the length of boys' hair." Goldstein, The Scope and Sources of School Board Authority to Regulate Student Conduct and Status: A Non-constitutional Analysis, 117 U.Pa.L.Rev. 373, 400, 422 (1969). [27] 448 F.2d 258 (10th Cir.1971). [28] Id. at 261. [29] Compare the following language of the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment, which provides: [N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.... and the due

1972Finally, at least one scholar has argued that under a non-constitutional analysis, school boards lack legitimate “power to dictate the length of boys’ hair.” Gold-stein, The Scope and Sources of School Board Authority to Regulate Student Conduct and Status: A Non-constitutional Analysis, 117 U.Pa.L.Rev. 373, 400, 422 (1969). . 448 F.2d 258 (10th Cir.1971). .