hearing claim (Alaska) · Go Syfert
← Alaska issues

hearing claim in Alaska

6 Alaska opinions name it 1 courts 1984–2020 0 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.

Followed or applied (8)

CaseFollowedCited
Juan Valdez v. Mark A. Rosenbaum Al Terrault Julie Latuska Bill Parker George Gore Debbie Miller Allen Coopergreen
ca9 · 2002 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020Alaska Statute 33.30.231 was passed in 1986.61 It was part of a comprehensive overhaul of Title 33, Chapter 30: Prison Facilities and Prisoners.62 One purpose of the overhaul appears to have been to codify the obligations DOC assumed through its 1983 settlement with one subclass of the Cleary plaintiffs.63 A letter from the governor introducing the overhaul noted that the bill would authorize DOC to monitor prisoners’ calls “so as to 56 The only federal case to consider the provision, Valdez v. Rosenbaum, dealt with restrictions on an inmate’s telephone privileges after he was placed in admini

11
State, Department of Corrections v. Hendricks-Pearcegreen
alaska · 2011 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020Alaska Statute 33.30.231 was passed in 1986.61 It was part of a comprehensive overhaul of Title 33, Chapter 30: Prison Facilities and Prisoners.62 One purpose of the overhaul appears to have been to codify the obligations DOC assumed through its 1983 settlement with one subclass of the Cleary plaintiffs.63 A letter from the governor introducing the overhaul noted that the bill would authorize DOC to monitor prisoners’ calls “so as to 56 The only federal case to consider the provision, Valdez v. Rosenbaum, dealt with restrictions on an inmate’s telephone privileges after he was placed in admini

11
Hertz v. State, Department of Correctionsgreen
alaska · 2010 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
2 sentences

2020Right to reasonable access to a telephone under AS 33.30.231 Alaska Statute 33.30.231(a) provides: “A prisoner shall have reasonable access to a telephone except when access is suspended as punishment for conviction of a rule infraction or pending a hearing for a rule infraction involving telephone abuse.” We have not yet had occasion to interpret this provision’s guarantee of “reasonable 52 Decision and Order, Cleary v. Smith, No. 3AN-81-05274 CI, at *4-*8 (Alaska Super., July 3, 2001); AS 09.19.200(a); see also Hertz v. State, Dep’t of Corr., 230 P.3d 663, 667 (Alaska 2010) (holding prisoner

2020Right to reasonable access to a telephone under AS 33.30.231 Alaska Statute 33.30.231(a) provides: “A prisoner shall have reasonable access to a telephone except when access is suspended as punishment for conviction of a rule infraction or pending a hearing for a rule infraction involving telephone abuse.” We have not yet had occasion to interpret this provision’s guarantee of “reasonable 52 Decision and Order, Cleary v. Smith, No. 3AN-81-05274 CI, at *4-*8 (Alaska Super., July 3, 2001); AS 09.19.200(a); see also Hertz v. State, Dep’t of Corr., 230 P.3d 663, 667 (Alaska 2010) (holding prisoner

11
McGAHUEY v. WHITESTONE LOGGING, INC.green
alaska · 2011 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2020–2020
1 sentence

2020Viewed in isolation, without weighing these opinions, they were sufficient to rebut the presumption that Butts suffered any work-related injury beyond the left knee contusion. 18 McGahuey v. Whitestone Logging, Inc., 262 P.3d 613, 620 (Alaska 2011). 19 We have not determined how (if at all) the 2005 amendments changed the rebuttal stage of the presumption analysis when there is a preexisting condition.

11
Douglas v. State, Department of Revenuegreen
alaska · 1994 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008Cf. Hermosillo v. Hermosillo, 797 P.2d 1206 , 1208 n. 1 (Alaska 1990) (visitation order entered without a hearing not a violation of due process if hearing not requested); Douglas v. State, Dep't of Revenue, 880 P.2d 113, 116-17 (Alaska 1994) (prisoner's due process rights were not violated by failure to hold evidentiary hearing on inability to pay child support where minimum support obligation was imposed regardless of inability to pay because there were no factual issues to resolve). 12 .

11
Alaska Housing Finance Corp. v. Salvuccigreen
alaska · 1997 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2001–2001
1 sentence

2001Alaska Housing Finance Corp. v. Salvucci, 950 P.2d 1116, 1121 (Alaska 1997). 11 .

11
Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Donovangreen
ca5 · 1960 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1991–1991
1 sentence

1991See, e.g., Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Donovan, 279 F.2d 75 (5th Cir.1960) (interpreting Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C.A. § 919 (c)); City of Humphrey v. Woodward, 628 S.W.2d 574 (Ark.App.1982); Bethany Medical Center v. Knox, 10 Kan.App.2d 192 , 694 P.2d 1331 (1985); Lauer v. Tri-Mont Cooperative Creamery, 287 Minn. 221 , 178 N.W.2d 248 (1970); Steele v. North Dakota Workmen’s Compensation Bureau, 273 N.W.2d 692 (N.D.1978); Herring v. Welltech, Inc., 660 P.2d 361 (Wyo.1983). 5 .

11
Forquer v. State, Commercial Fisheries Entry Commissiongreen
alaska · 1984 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
1 sentence

1984See Forquer v. State, Commercial Fisheries Entry Comm'n., 677 P.2d 1236 (Alaska 1984) (20 AAC 05.520(e) inconsistent with the hearing requirement of AS 16.43.-260(c)). .

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alaska. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (7)

CaseCitedYears
Seville v. Holland America Line Westours, Inc. green
alaska · 1999
1 sentence

2020Line Westours, Inc., 977 P.2d 103 , 111 n.49 (Alaska 1999) (quoting RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS § 318(3) (AM.

12020–2020
Hermosillo v. Hermosillo green
alaska · 1990
1 sentence

2008Cf. Hermosillo v. Hermosillo, 797 P.2d 1206 , 1208 n. 1 (Alaska 1990) (visitation order entered without a hearing not a violation of due process if hearing not requested); Douglas v. State, Dep't of Revenue, 880 P.2d 113, 116-17 (Alaska 1994) (prisoner's due process rights were not violated by failure to hold evidentiary hearing on inability to pay child support where minimum support obligation was imposed regardless of inability to pay because there were no factual issues to resolve). 12 .

12008–2008
Steele v. North Dakota Workmen's Compensation Bureau green
nd · 1978
1 sentence

1991See, e.g., Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Donovan, 279 F.2d 75 (5th Cir.1960) (interpreting Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C.A. § 919 (c)); City of Humphrey v. Woodward, 628 S.W.2d 574 (Ark.App.1982); Bethany Medical Center v. Knox, 10 Kan.App.2d 192 , 694 P.2d 1331 (1985); Lauer v. Tri-Mont Cooperative Creamery, 287 Minn. 221 , 178 N.W.2d 248 (1970); Steele v. North Dakota Workmen’s Compensation Bureau, 273 N.W.2d 692 (N.D.1978); Herring v. Welltech, Inc., 660 P.2d 361 (Wyo.1983). 5 .

11991–1991
City of Humphrey v. Woodward green
arkctapp · 1982
1 sentence

1991See, e.g., Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Donovan, 279 F.2d 75 (5th Cir.1960) (interpreting Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C.A. § 919 (c)); City of Humphrey v. Woodward, 628 S.W.2d 574 (Ark.App.1982); Bethany Medical Center v. Knox, 10 Kan.App.2d 192 , 694 P.2d 1331 (1985); Lauer v. Tri-Mont Cooperative Creamery, 287 Minn. 221 , 178 N.W.2d 248 (1970); Steele v. North Dakota Workmen’s Compensation Bureau, 273 N.W.2d 692 (N.D.1978); Herring v. Welltech, Inc., 660 P.2d 361 (Wyo.1983). 5 .

11991–1991
Bethany Medical Center v. Knox green
kanctapp · 1985
2 sentences

1991See, e.g., Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Donovan, 279 F.2d 75 (5th Cir.1960) (interpreting Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C.A. § 919 (c)); City of Humphrey v. Woodward, 628 S.W.2d 574 (Ark.App.1982); Bethany Medical Center v. Knox, 10 Kan.App.2d 192 , 694 P.2d 1331 (1985); Lauer v. Tri-Mont Cooperative Creamery, 287 Minn. 221 , 178 N.W.2d 248 (1970); Steele v. North Dakota Workmen’s Compensation Bureau, 273 N.W.2d 692 (N.D.1978); Herring v. Welltech, Inc., 660 P.2d 361 (Wyo.1983). 5 .

1991See, e.g., Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Donovan, 279 F.2d 75 (5th Cir.1960) (interpreting Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C.A. § 919 (c)); City of Humphrey v. Woodward, 628 S.W.2d 574 (Ark.App.1982); Bethany Medical Center v. Knox, 10 Kan.App.2d 192 , 694 P.2d 1331 (1985); Lauer v. Tri-Mont Cooperative Creamery, 287 Minn. 221 , 178 N.W.2d 248 (1970); Steele v. North Dakota Workmen’s Compensation Bureau, 273 N.W.2d 692 (N.D.1978); Herring v. Welltech, Inc., 660 P.2d 361 (Wyo.1983). 5 .

11991–1991
Lauer v. Tri-Mont Cooperative Creamery green
minn · 1970
2 sentences

1991See, e.g., Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Donovan, 279 F.2d 75 (5th Cir.1960) (interpreting Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C.A. § 919 (c)); City of Humphrey v. Woodward, 628 S.W.2d 574 (Ark.App.1982); Bethany Medical Center v. Knox, 10 Kan.App.2d 192 , 694 P.2d 1331 (1985); Lauer v. Tri-Mont Cooperative Creamery, 287 Minn. 221 , 178 N.W.2d 248 (1970); Steele v. North Dakota Workmen’s Compensation Bureau, 273 N.W.2d 692 (N.D.1978); Herring v. Welltech, Inc., 660 P.2d 361 (Wyo.1983). 5 .

1991See, e.g., Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Donovan, 279 F.2d 75 (5th Cir.1960) (interpreting Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C.A. § 919 (c)); City of Humphrey v. Woodward, 628 S.W.2d 574 (Ark.App.1982); Bethany Medical Center v. Knox, 10 Kan.App.2d 192 , 694 P.2d 1331 (1985); Lauer v. Tri-Mont Cooperative Creamery, 287 Minn. 221 , 178 N.W.2d 248 (1970); Steele v. North Dakota Workmen’s Compensation Bureau, 273 N.W.2d 692 (N.D.1978); Herring v. Welltech, Inc., 660 P.2d 361 (Wyo.1983). 5 .

11991–1991
Herring v. Welltech, Inc. green
wyo · 1983
1 sentence

1991See, e.g., Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Donovan, 279 F.2d 75 (5th Cir.1960) (interpreting Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C.A. § 919 (c)); City of Humphrey v. Woodward, 628 S.W.2d 574 (Ark.App.1982); Bethany Medical Center v. Knox, 10 Kan.App.2d 192 , 694 P.2d 1331 (1985); Lauer v. Tri-Mont Cooperative Creamery, 287 Minn. 221 , 178 N.W.2d 248 (1970); Steele v. North Dakota Workmen’s Compensation Bureau, 273 N.W.2d 692 (N.D.1978); Herring v. Welltech, Inc., 660 P.2d 361 (Wyo.1983). 5 .

11991–1991

Where else courts name it

LA 310 (1918–2025) NY 254 (1890–2026) OH 130 (1960–2026) TX 129 (1932–2026) PA 125 (1870–2026) CA 101 (1954–2026) IL 89 (1942–2026) FL 79 (1955–2025) GA 42 (1910–2024) MI 40 (1929–2025) MO 39 (1927–2025) IN 38 (1965–2025) AL 33 (1912–2018) WI 33 (1890–2025) CO 31 (1891–2026) MA 26 (1984–2026) MD 24 (1951–2024) CT 24 (1977–2025) NJ 23 (1958–2024) AZ 22 (1973–2025) WA 20 (1981–2025) OR 20 (1977–2026) DC 18 (1970–2023) NC 17 (1966–2023) MS 17 (1990–2021) NM 17 (1967–2022) IA 16 (1931–2023) MN 14 (1986–2024) KS 14 (1940–2024) MT 13 (1977–2026) UT 13 (1924–2026) TN 12 (1943–2026) OK 11 (1928–2016) RI 11 (1972–2025) AR 11 (1956–2021) WV 10 (1895–2026) NV 9 (1999–2020) ND 9 (1952–2025) VA 9 (1980–2025) KY 9 (1933–2020) ID 9 (1973–2022) HI 9 (1995–2025) DE 8 (1954–2025) SC 7 (1931–2026) AK 6 (1984–2020) NE 6 (1906–2021) WY 5 (1955–2007) NH 4 (1974–1989) ME 4 (2007–2012) VT 4 (1979–2014) VI 3 (2012–2016) SD 2 (1990–1990)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check