Legal Opinion

Oesau v. City of Dillingham

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided April 1, 1968No. 856PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

DIMOND, Justice.

Prior to 1963, the platted townsite of Dillingham, Alaska was not an incorporated municipality, but was a part of a larger area which had been incorporated as the Dillingham Public Utility District No. 1. In enacting legislation pertaining to borough government in Alaska, the legislature provided that special service districts, such as the Dillingham Public Utility District, would “continue to exercise their powers and functions under existing law until July 1, 1964.” 1 Thus, the dissolution of the Dillingham Public Utility District No. 1 was foreordained.

In 1963 there…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Fairview Public Utility District No. One v. City of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 1962

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Mobil Oil Corporation v. Local Boundary CommissionAlaska Supreme Court · 1974
  2. United States Smelting, Refining & Mining Co. v. Local Boundary CommissionAlaska Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Port Valdez Company, Inc. v. City of ValdezAlaska Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Lake & Peninsula Borough v. Local Boundary CommissionAlaska Supreme Court · 1994
  5. City of Douglas v. City and Borough of JuneauAlaska Supreme Court · 1971

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API