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.
6 Alaska opinions name it 1 courts 1992–2013 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Mathis v. Sausergreen2 sentences2013Mathis, 942 P.2d at 1121 n. 6 (quoting Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 822 , 97 S.Ct. 1491 , 52 L.Ed.2d 72 (1977). 28 . 2013In Mathis v. Sauser, 942 P.2d 1117, 1120-21 (Alaska 1997), we used a sliding-scale analysis for prisoner court access; the inquiries in that analysis are consistent with our procedural due process analysis. 27 . | 1 | 1 |
State Ex Rel. Departments of Transportation & Labor v. Enserch Alaska Construction, Inc.green1 sentence1998See State v. Enserch Alaska Constr., 787 P.2d 624, 631 (Alaska 1989). | 1 | 1 |
Gonzales v. Safeway Stores, Inc.green2 sentences1995In analyzing Shepherd’s claim, the court states that Aaska’s equal protection clause “requires equal treatment only for those who are similarly situated.” The court then concludes that “[Resident and nonresident recreational users of Aaska fish and game are not similarly situated.” In footnote 12, the court explains as follows: “Concluding that two classes are not similarly situated necessarily implies that the different legal treatment of the two classes is justified by the differences between the two classes.” 1 Thus, the court disposes of Shepherd’s claim without applying the sliding scale 1995In analyzing Shepherd's claim, the court states that Alaska's equal protection clause "requires equal treatment only for those who are similarly situated." The court then concludes that "[r]esident and nonresident recreational users of Alaska fish and game are not similarly situated." In footnote 12, the court explains as follows: "Concluding that two classes are not similarly situated necessarily implies that the *46 different legal treatment of the two classes is justified by the differences between the two classes." [1] Thus, the court disposes of Shepherd's claim without applying the slidi | 1 | 1 |
Falcon v. Alaska Public Offices Commissiongreen1 sentence1995Constitutional interest/level of scrutiny CF J argues that the statute and regulation infringe on a fundamental interest, the physician-patient relationship, and consequently require a “very high level of justification.” See Falcon v. Alaska Public Offices Comm’n, 570 P.2d 469, 476 (Alaska 1977). | 1 | 1 |
Matson v. State, Commercial Fisheries Entry Commissiongreen2 sentences1992Applying the sliding scale test to a case involving the right to employment, this court must “closely scrutinize enactments which interfere with that right.” Matson v. Commercial Fisheries Entry Comm’n, 785 P.2d 1200, 1205 (Alaska 1990). 1992Applying the sliding scale test to a case involving the right to employment, this court must "closely scrutinize enactments which interfere with that right." Matson v. Commercial Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 785 P.2d 1200, 1205 (Alaska 1990). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alaska. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bounds v. Smith
red
2 sentences2013Mathis, 942 P.2d at 1121 n. 6 (quoting Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 822 , 97 S.Ct. 1491 , 52 L.Ed.2d 72 (1977). 28 . 2013Mathis, 942 P.2d at 1121 n. 6 (quoting Bounds v. Smith, 430 U.S. 817, 822 , 97 S.Ct. 1491 , 52 L.Ed.2d 72 (1977). 28 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Municipality of Anchorage v. Anchorage Police Department Employees Ass'n
green
1 sentence1996In Municipality of Anchorage, we applied a sliding-scale analysis to the Anchorage Municipal Assembly’s delegation of power to a private arbitrator to make final and binding determinations in certain labor contract disputes. 839 P.2d at 1080 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Alaska Pacific Assurance Co. v. Brown
green
1 sentence1995Id. at 274 . [2] In analyzing equal protection issues under the Alaska Constitution, this court applies a three-step sliding scale test: First, it must be determined ... what weight should be afforded the constitutional interest impaired by the challenged enactment. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
State v. Erickson
green
2 sentences1992In State v. Erickson, 574 P.2d 1 (Alaska 1978), we adopted a single flexible test to review legal challenges to governmental action based upon the Alaska Constitution’s equal protection clause. 1 This test, which has come to be known as the sliding scale test, provides for varying levels of scrutiny depending on the importance of the right involved. 1992In State v. Erickson, 574 P.2d 1 (Alaska 1978), we adopted a single flexible test to *998 review legal challenges to governmental action based upon the Alaska Constitution's equal protection clause. [1] This test, which has come to be known as the sliding scale test, provides for varying levels of scrutiny depending on the importance of the right involved. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
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.