11 Mar Alaska Supreme & Appellate Court Headnotes From 3.6.2017
Featured Case: Family Law | Alienation of Affections
DAVID F. COULSON | APPELLANT, V. AARON T. STEINER | APPELLEE | Alaska Supreme Court
Former husband’s cause of action for alienation of affections was properly dismissed by summary judgment because Alaska does not recognize the tort of alienation of affections on the grounds that there should be no recovery of economic losses suffered as a result of a divorce.
Family law – Alienation of affections
Alaska Supreme Court Headnotes
DAVID F. COULSON, APPELLANT, V. AARON T. STEINER, APPELLEE.
Former husband’s claims of fraud and civil conspiracy and negligent infliction of emotional distress were not based on economic losses suffered as a result of defendant causing the divorce. Rather, they stemmed from actions that occurred during the divorce, and therefore should not have been dismissed on motion for summary judgment.
Family law – Fraud and civil conspiracy – Negligent infliction of emotional distress – Summary Judgment
DAVID F. COULSON, APPELLANT, V. AARON T. STEINER, APPELLEE.
Courts must freely grant motions to continue discovery in order to fully and completely litigate a case and prevent premature grants of summary judgment.
Family law – Summary Judgment – Discovery
JESSIE C. RICE, APPELLANT, V. JOHN C. McDONALD and CHARLES RICE, APPELLEES.
The Alaska Supreme Court confirmed that the Indian Child Welfare Act applies to custody disputes involving Indian children, such as those involved in the case at bar.
Family law – Indian Child Welfare Act
JESSIE C. RICE, APPELLANT, V. JOHN C. McDONALD and CHARLES RICE, APPELLEES.
Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act – Alaska trial court’s decision to cede jurisdiction to Texas court pursuant to Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act was an abuse of discretion because the Alaska trial court minimized the presence of the domestic abuse and application of the Indian Child Welfare Act, while overemphasizing the nature and location of evidence.
Family law – Inconvenient forum – Abuse of discretion
MARVIN KOCUREK, APPELLANT, V. RICHARD WAGNER, APPELLEE.
The record reflects that the trial court correctly applied the “against the weight of the evidence” legal standard and therefore the trial court’s denial of the party’s request to set aside the verdict and order a new trial was not in error.
Civil law – Motion for new trial – Amendment of judgment – Against the weight of the evidence
MARVIN KOCUREK, APPELLANT, V. RICHARD WAGNER, APPELLEE.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied the party’s request to set aside the verdict and order a new trial because of the evidentiary basis for the jury’s decision and the fact that the trial court did not commit any errors that met the level of “exceptional circumstances” that required appellate review to “prevent a miscarriage of justice.”