28 U.S.C. § 81A
Alaska
Alaska constitutes one judicial district.
Court shall be held at Anchorage, Fairbanks, Juneau, Ketchikan, and Nome.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1960–2019 · leading case: Alaska Mines & Minerals, Inc. v. Alaska Indus. Bd., 354 P.2d 376 (Alaska 1960).
Alaska Mines & Minerals, Inc. v. Alaska Indus. Bd., 354 P.2d 376 (Alaska 1960). “Jurisdiction over further proceedings in this action will devolve upon the newly created Superior Court of the State of Alaska, by reason of Section 16 of the Alaska Statehood Act, Public Law 85-508, 72 Stat. 350, approved July 7, 1958, 48 U.”
State v. Salinas, 362 P.2d 298 (Alaska 1961). “1584 (1960), 28 U.S.C.A. § 81A note. 2 . “Sec. 15. All causes pending or determined in tlie District Court for the Territory of Alaska at the time of the admission of Alaska as a State which are of such nature as to be within the jurisdiction of a district court of the United…”
United States v. Luis Francisco Contreras-Ceballos, 999 F.2d 432 (9th Cir. 1993). “28 U.S.C. § 81A. The court denied his request.”
Phillips v. Jones, 355 P.2d 166 (Alaska 1960). “10,867 on February 20, 1960, 28 U.S.C.A. § 81A note. Jurisdiction over further proceedings in this action will devolve upon the newly created Superior Court of the State of Alaska, by reason of Section 16 of the Alaska Statehood Act, Public Law 85-508, 72 Stat.”
United States v. Pleier, 849 F. Supp. 1321 (D. Alaska 1994). “The Plan creates five divisions which are used in the petit jury selection process: Anchorage, Fairbanks, Juneau, Ketchikan, and Nome.”
Salinas v. State, 373 P.2d 512 (Alaska 1962). “1584 (1960), 28 U.S.C.A. § 81A note. 3 . Salinas v. United States, 277 F.”
Theodore v. Zurich Gen. Accident & Liab. Ins. Co., 364 P.2d 51 (Alaska 1961). “1584 (1960), 28 U.S.C.A. § 81A note; Alaska Statehood Act, § 18, 72 Stat.”
Hendricks v. Alcoa S.S. Co., 206 F. Supp. 693 (E.D. Pa. 1962). “See 28 U.S.C.A. § 81A. [6] Because of the definitions included in 28 U.”
United States v. McDonald, 740 F. Supp. 757 (D. Alaska 1990). “is without prejudice to a transfer of the trial to any federal district court [sic] in the District of Alaska or the Western District of Washington” (presumably meaning any place in Alaska where the court, under 28 U.S.C. § 81A, is entitled to hold court).”
Alaska Airlines v. United States, 399 F. Supp. 906 (N.D. Cal. 1975). “There is one district in Alaska, but the statute —28 U.S.C. § 81A — provides for five places of holding court: Anchorage, Fairbanks, Juneau, Ketchikan and Nome.”
Gladden v. Reigh (D. Alaska 2019). “1584 (February 20, 1960) (terminating the United State District Court for the Territory of Alaska in anticipation of the transition and replacement with the United States District Court for the District of Alaska upon Alaska’s statehood.”
People v. Walsh, 97 Cal. Rptr. 2d 209 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000). “, 28 U.S.C. §§ 81A [Alaska], 82 [Arizona], 91 [Hawaii], 117 [Oregon]), we are satisfied that no constitutional right of defendant is violated by permitting the prosecution of this case to take place in San Mateo County.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.