The Alaska Department of Natural, Justia Opinion Summary: Mother Miranda T. appealed the superior courts entry of a disposition order in child in need of aid (CINA) proceedings. [T]he superior court must consider sales costs when its property division is premised on an economically disadvantaged party being forced to sell a house.12 But that was not the case here: the court found that Burns-Marshall was the economically advantaged party and allowed him to decide whether to sell the property awarded to him.13. Oral arguments this semester took place in the Alaska Supreme Court Courtroom in front of Alaska Supreme Court Justice Jennifer S. Henderson. Several students have commented to me that it has inspired them to pursue their legal careers further," Fortson says. 4. When the legislature did this in 2005, there was a lot of pushback, I think, within the legal community, people giving advice, saying This is not right. The five supreme court justices, by majority vote, select one of their members to be the chief justice. We review a superior court's ruling on a party's request to reopen evidence for abuse of discretion.4, The valuation of property is a question of fact and is reviewed for clear error.5 The superior court's ultimate distribution of assets is reviewed for abuse of discretion, and will be reversed only if the distribution is clearly unjust.6. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google. UAA offers more than 100 degree and certificate programs that consistently prepare students for success after graduation. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. The following is a list of conference line numbers for each judge. 5. THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ALASKA MARK N. WAYSON, Appellant, v. WILLIAM E. STEVENSON, Appellee. ) The court found her testimony credible, applied the statutory domestic violence presumption, and awarded her primary physical and sole legal custody of the child. the local legal community, and within UAA, the hope is that the presence of a simulated Furthermore, the superior court is only required to consider the cost of sale of awarded property in a property division when the sale is certain and the direct result of the property division.14 Here the court acknowledged that Burns-Marshall could decide whether to sell or keep the properties, even though it recognized that Burns-Marshall would likely have to sell or liquidate some assets to make the equalization payment. : S-18082 S-18101: IN RE: THE 2021 REDISTRICTING CASES (Matanuska-Susitna Borough: April 21, 2023: Supreme Court Nos. The court also changed the day of one of the scheduled weekly calls between Burns-Marshall and the child. Alaska's supreme court was founded along with the rest of Alaska's court system, about six months after statehood. Locations & Hours v. Valhalla Mining, LLC, et al. Pay Online Restitution Collection, Accessibility Community Advancement in Psychology (ANCAP), Alaska Native, Indigenous & Rural Outreach Burns-Marshall affirmatively stated that two hours of additional trial time for rebuttal should be more than enough to present his rebuttal witnesses.7 Burns-Marshall did nothing to suggest that he wished to present additional evidence after presenting his rebuttal and sur-surrebuttal. A justice must be licensed to practice law in Alaska at the time of appointment and must have engaged in the active practice of law for eight years. To be eligible for appointment, a person must be a citizen of the United States and a resident of Alaska for five years prior to appointment. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Supreme Court No. The Superior Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion By Failing To Address The Costs And Risks Of Sale Of The Property. The public may watch proceedings on Gavel Alaska, but not attend in-person. The court meets after oral argument and on a bi-weekly basis to confer on cases argued orally and on cases submitted on the briefs. And having the chance to argue their brief in front of a judge is the reward Are you interested in a career in the legal field? Supreme Court Bar. While the court's property division made it likely that Burns-Marshall would have to sell or liquidate some property to make the equalization payment to Krogman, the sale of the real property was not so certain as to require the court to consider the consequences of its sale.15 Under these circumstances, it was not an abuse of discretion to award Burns-Marshall the property without considering the costs of sale.16.
St George's Neurology Contact Number, The Palisades Country Club General Manager, Commonlit I Have A Dream Answer Key, Donald Lendberg Chief'' Loving Death, Articles A