precise claim (Alaska) · Go Syfert
← Alaska issues

precise claim in Alaska

6 Alaska opinions name it 2 courts 1969–2025 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.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Mendenhall v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 2002 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021
1 sentence

2021Given our rejection of the A.L.I. test for insanity, Dorsey’s proposed involuntary intoxication defense was not a viable defense under Alaska law.50 (See Mendenhall v. State, 77 S.W.3d 815, 817-18 (Tex. Crim.

11
Carter v. Stategreen
alaskactapp · 1981 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1982–1982
1 sentence

1982Similar claims were rejected by our supreme court in Danks v. State, 619 P.2d 720 (Alaska 1980) and by this court in Carter v. State, 625 P.2d 313, 315 (Alaska App.1981).

11
United States v. Cruzgreen
txwd · 1967 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1974–1974
1 sentence

1974As stated in United States v. Cruz, 265 F.Supp. 15, 23 (W.D.Tex.1967), “There is no fixed rule as to the time an officer must wait after announcing his authority and purpose before using force to break into a residence.

11
Maryland Casualty Co. v. Pacific Coal & Oil Co.green
scotus · 1941 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1969–1969
2 sentences

1969Co. v. Pacific Coal & Iron Co., 812 U.S. 270 , 273, 61 S.Ct. 510, 512 , 85 L.Ed. 826, 828-829 (1941), the court said: The difference between an abstract question and a “controversy” contemplated by the Declaratory Judgment Act is necessarily one of degree, and it would be difficult, if it would be possible, to fashion a precise test for determining in every case whether there is such a controversy.

1969Co. v. Pacific Coal & Iron Co., 812 U.S. 270 , 273, 61 S.Ct. 510, 512 , 85 L.Ed. 826, 828-829 (1941), the court said: The difference between an abstract question and a “controversy” contemplated by the Declaratory Judgment Act is necessarily one of degree, and it would be difficult, if it would be possible, to fashion a precise test for determining in every case whether there is such a controversy.

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 (4)

CaseCitedYears
Methonen v. Stone green
alaska · 1997
1 sentence

2025STANDARD OF REVIEW We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, reading the record in the light most favorable to the opposing party and drawing all reasonable inferences in its favor.3 “Summary judgment is proper if there is no genuine factual dispute and the 3 Methonen, 941 P.2d at 1250 . -4- 2115 moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”4 The correct interpretation of insurance policy language is a question of law that we review de novo.5 DISCUSSION In this case we consider whether Walter Elrod’s eye injury arose out of the use of a motor vehicle for purposes of Florida la

12025–2025
In re Morris green
mich · 2012
1 sentence

2014In re Morris, 491 Mich. 81 , 815 N.W.2d 62 , 64-65 (2012).

12014–2014
Gryger v. Burke green
scotus · 1948
2 sentences

1982This precise claim was rejected by the United States Supreme Court in Gryger v. Burke, 334 U.S. 728 , 68 S.Ct. 1256 , 92 L.Ed. 1683 (1948).

1982This precise claim was rejected by the United States Supreme Court in Gryger v. Burke, 334 U.S. 728 , 68 S.Ct. 1256 , 92 L.Ed. 1683 (1948).

11982–1982
Danks v. State green
alaska · 1980
1 sentence

1982Similar claims were rejected by our supreme court in Danks v. State, 619 P.2d 720 (Alaska 1980) and by this court in Carter v. State, 625 P.2d 313, 315 (Alaska App.1981).

11982–1982

Where else courts name it

CA 154 (1899–2026) TX 76 (1866–2025) IL 63 (1878–2024) PA 52 (1810–2025) NY 51 (1867–2026) CT 44 (1920–2025) NJ 44 (1910–2026) IA 39 (1877–2026) MO 34 (1900–2025) FL 32 (1967–2017) OH 31 (1888–2026) OR 28 (1901–2025) DC 28 (1950–2024) AL 26 (1839–2024) MI 23 (1865–2026) LA 23 (1962–2024) WA 19 (1945–2020) IN 19 (1841–2026) MA 18 (1938–2024) MD 17 (1958–2010) NC 14 (1889–2011) KY 13 (1908–2018) GA 13 (1884–2024) CO 12 (1895–2024) WV 12 (1937–2020) VA 12 (1887–2025) AZ 11 (1908–2021) WI 11 (1914–2020) OK 11 (1897–2023) KS 11 (1915–2021) TN 10 (1992–2024) VT 10 (1991–2025) ID 10 (1895–2018) DE 9 (1980–2025) MS 8 (1895–2026) MT 8 (1925–2008) UT 7 (1996–2021) WY 7 (1900–2013) MN 7 (1976–2014) NV 6 (1992–2015) AK 6 (1969–2025) ME 5 (1892–2014) HI 4 (1972–2023) RI 4 (1977–2007) NE 4 (1873–2017) AR 4 (1971–2018) SD 3 (2007–2009) ND 3 (1915–1990) NM 2 (1924–1968) NH 2 (1961–2008) SC 2 (1992–2002) PR 2 (1994–2007)

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