party making claim in Alaska

6 Alaska opinions name it 1 courts 1978–2017 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 (10)

Case	Followed	Cited
Cook Schuhmann & Groseclose, Inc. v. Brown & Root, Inc.green alaska · 2005 · cited in 2 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2008–2009 2 sentences 2009Cook Schuhmann & Groseclose, Inc. v. Brown & Root, Inc., 116 P.3d 592, 597 (Alaska 2005). 35 . 2008Ass'n v. Pruitt, 38 P.3d 528, 534 (Alaska 2001), We note that neither Froines nor VFDA appears to dispute this conclusion on appeal. [5] Marron v. Strornstad, 123 P.3d 992, 998 (Alaska 2005). [6] Cook Schuhmann & Groseclose, Inc. v. Brown & Root, Inc., 116 P.3d 592, 597 (Alaska 2005). [7] Gamble v. Northstore P'ship, 28 P.3d 286, 293 (Alaska 2001). [8] State v. Native Village of Nunapitchuk, 156 P.3d 389, 398 (Alaska 2007) ("Rule 82's primary purpose is to partially compensate a prevailing party."). [9] Mapco Exp., Inc. v. Faulk, 24 P.3d 531, 542-43 (Alaska 2001). [10] Mackie v. Chizmar, 965 P	2	2
Anchorage v. Sandberggreen alaska · 1993 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016 1 sentence 2016Anchorage v. Sandberg, 861 P.2d 554, 557 (Alaska 1993). 7 .	1	1
Gamble v. Northstore Partnershipgreen alaska · 2001 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Ass'n v. Pruitt, 38 P.3d 528, 534 (Alaska 2001), We note that neither Froines nor VFDA appears to dispute this conclusion on appeal. [5] Marron v. Strornstad, 123 P.3d 992, 998 (Alaska 2005). [6] Cook Schuhmann & Groseclose, Inc. v. Brown & Root, Inc., 116 P.3d 592, 597 (Alaska 2005). [7] Gamble v. Northstore P'ship, 28 P.3d 286, 293 (Alaska 2001). [8] State v. Native Village of Nunapitchuk, 156 P.3d 389, 398 (Alaska 2007) ("Rule 82's primary purpose is to partially compensate a prevailing party."). [9] Mapco Exp., Inc. v. Faulk, 24 P.3d 531, 542-43 (Alaska 2001). [10] Mackie v. Chizmar, 965 P	1	1
MacKie v. Chizmargreen alaska · 1998 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Ass'n v. Pruitt, 38 P.3d 528, 534 (Alaska 2001), We note that neither Froines nor VFDA appears to dispute this conclusion on appeal. [5] Marron v. Strornstad, 123 P.3d 992, 998 (Alaska 2005). [6] Cook Schuhmann & Groseclose, Inc. v. Brown & Root, Inc., 116 P.3d 592, 597 (Alaska 2005). [7] Gamble v. Northstore P'ship, 28 P.3d 286, 293 (Alaska 2001). [8] State v. Native Village of Nunapitchuk, 156 P.3d 389, 398 (Alaska 2007) ("Rule 82's primary purpose is to partially compensate a prevailing party."). [9] Mapco Exp., Inc. v. Faulk, 24 P.3d 531, 542-43 (Alaska 2001). [10] Mackie v. Chizmar, 965 P	1	1
United Services Automobile Ass'n v. Pruitt Ex Rel. Pruittgreen alaska · 2001 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Ass'n v. Pruitt, 38 P.3d 528, 534 (Alaska 2001), We note that neither Froines nor VFDA appears to dispute this conclusion on appeal. [5] Marron v. Strornstad, 123 P.3d 992, 998 (Alaska 2005). [6] Cook Schuhmann & Groseclose, Inc. v. Brown & Root, Inc., 116 P.3d 592, 597 (Alaska 2005). [7] Gamble v. Northstore P'ship, 28 P.3d 286, 293 (Alaska 2001). [8] State v. Native Village of Nunapitchuk, 156 P.3d 389, 398 (Alaska 2007) ("Rule 82's primary purpose is to partially compensate a prevailing party."). [9] Mapco Exp., Inc. v. Faulk, 24 P.3d 531, 542-43 (Alaska 2001). [10] Mackie v. Chizmar, 965 P	1	1
State v. Native Village of Nunapitchukgreen alaska · 2007 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Ass'n v. Pruitt, 38 P.3d 528, 534 (Alaska 2001), We note that neither Froines nor VFDA appears to dispute this conclusion on appeal. [5] Marron v. Strornstad, 123 P.3d 992, 998 (Alaska 2005). [6] Cook Schuhmann & Groseclose, Inc. v. Brown & Root, Inc., 116 P.3d 592, 597 (Alaska 2005). [7] Gamble v. Northstore P'ship, 28 P.3d 286, 293 (Alaska 2001). [8] State v. Native Village of Nunapitchuk, 156 P.3d 389, 398 (Alaska 2007) ("Rule 82's primary purpose is to partially compensate a prevailing party."). [9] Mapco Exp., Inc. v. Faulk, 24 P.3d 531, 542-43 (Alaska 2001). [10] Mackie v. Chizmar, 965 P	1	1
Marron v. Stromstadgreen alaska · 2005 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Ass'n v. Pruitt, 38 P.3d 528, 534 (Alaska 2001), We note that neither Froines nor VFDA appears to dispute this conclusion on appeal. [5] Marron v. Strornstad, 123 P.3d 992, 998 (Alaska 2005). [6] Cook Schuhmann & Groseclose, Inc. v. Brown & Root, Inc., 116 P.3d 592, 597 (Alaska 2005). [7] Gamble v. Northstore P'ship, 28 P.3d 286, 293 (Alaska 2001). [8] State v. Native Village of Nunapitchuk, 156 P.3d 389, 398 (Alaska 2007) ("Rule 82's primary purpose is to partially compensate a prevailing party."). [9] Mapco Exp., Inc. v. Faulk, 24 P.3d 531, 542-43 (Alaska 2001). [10] Mackie v. Chizmar, 965 P	1	1
Mapco Express, Inc. v. Faulkgreen alaska · 2001 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008 1 sentence 2008Ass'n v. Pruitt, 38 P.3d 528, 534 (Alaska 2001), We note that neither Froines nor VFDA appears to dispute this conclusion on appeal. [5] Marron v. Strornstad, 123 P.3d 992, 998 (Alaska 2005). [6] Cook Schuhmann & Groseclose, Inc. v. Brown & Root, Inc., 116 P.3d 592, 597 (Alaska 2005). [7] Gamble v. Northstore P'ship, 28 P.3d 286, 293 (Alaska 2001). [8] State v. Native Village of Nunapitchuk, 156 P.3d 389, 398 (Alaska 2007) ("Rule 82's primary purpose is to partially compensate a prevailing party."). [9] Mapco Exp., Inc. v. Faulk, 24 P.3d 531, 542-43 (Alaska 2001). [10] Mackie v. Chizmar, 965 P	1	1
Myers v. Snow White Cleaners & Linen Supply, Inc.green alaska · 1989 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004 1 sentence 2004Grow v. Ruggles, 860 P.2d 1225, 1227 (Alaska 1993) (finding trial court assessing costs and attorney's fees under Rule 68 may not consider offers that fail to comply with this rule) (citing Myers v. Snow White Cleaners & Linen Supply, Inc., 770 P.2d 750, 753 (Alaska 1989)). 5 .	1	1
Grow v. Rugglesgreen alaska · 1993 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004 1 sentence 2004Grow v. Ruggles, 860 P.2d 1225, 1227 (Alaska 1993) (finding trial court assessing costs and attorney's fees under Rule 68 may not consider offers that fail to comply with this rule) (citing Myers v. Snow White Cleaners & Linen Supply, Inc., 770 P.2d 750, 753 (Alaska 1989)). 5 .	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (3)

Case	Cited	Years
Progressive Corp. v. Peter Ex Rel. Peter green alaska · 2008 1 sentence 2017At oral argument Peter Pan explained that, based on the facts of the case, it had assigned little value to Charles's claim. 195 P.3d 1083 , 1087 (Alaska 2008).	1	2017–2017
Froines v. Valdez Fisheries Development Ass'n green alaska · 2003 2 sentences 2008Assn, Inc., 75 P.3d 83 (Alaska 2003). [2] Id. at 90 . [3] Rule 68(b)(2) provides: (b) If the judgment finally rendered by the court is at least 5 percent less favorable to the offeree than the offer, . . . the offeree, whether the party making the claim or defending against the claim, shall pay all costs as allowed under the Civil Rules and shall pay reasonable actual attorney's fees incurred by the offeror from the date the offer was made as follows: . . . . (2) if the offer was served more than 60 days after the date established in the pretrial order for initial disclosures required by Civil 2008Assn, Inc., 75 P.3d 83 (Alaska 2003). [2] Id. at 90 . [3] Rule 68(b)(2) provides: (b) If the judgment finally rendered by the court is at least 5 percent less favorable to the offeree than the offer, . . . the offeree, whether the party making the claim or defending against the claim, shall pay all costs as allowed under the Civil Rules and shall pay reasonable actual attorney's fees incurred by the offeror from the date the offer was made as follows: . . . . (2) if the offer was served more than 60 days after the date established in the pretrial order for initial disclosures required by Civil	1	2008–2008
Guard v. Benson green alaska · 1968 1 sentence 1978In Guard v. Benson, 438 P.2d 219 (Alaska 1968), the defendant moved to set aside the judgment on the basis of a sworn, uncontro-verted affidavit to the effect that he did not know the party making the claim against him and that he had never owned or ordered repairs to the aircraft which was the subject of the plaintiff’s claim.	1	1978–1978

Where else courts name it

KS 46 (1934–2025) NY 39 (1863–2025) IL 27 (1902–2026) AL 23 (1942–2010) CT 20 (1976–2003) OH 20 (2001–2025) IN 18 (1991–2020) TX 17 (1981–2024) CA 16 (1891–2016) MO 15 (1884–2017) LA 14 (1986–2025) VA 14 (1910–2018) NM 13 (1981–2024) MT 12 (1994–2022) AZ 11 (1981–2024) MA 10 (1914–2009) PA 10 (1911–2014) NC 10 (1928–2017) WA 9 (2000–2015) MI 7 (1912–2025) NJ 7 (1984–2025) FL 6 (1985–2019) AK 6 (1978–2017) NE 6 (1947–2019) WY 5 (1970–2021) IA 5 (1986–2023) OR 5 (1993–2020) WV 4 (1877–2004) RI 4 (1949–2007) WI 4 (1988–2025) GA 3 (1928–1947) TN 3 (1951–2001) MD 3 (1977–2002) KY 3 (1947–2013) ND 3 (1901–2007) VT 3 (1987–2017) ID 3 (1992–2016) NH 3 (1850–2020) UT 3 (1997–2019) AR 2 (1912–1989) MN 2 (2011–2013) MS 2 (2009–2014)

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