Legal Opinion

Mesiar v. Heckman

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided September 11, 1998No. S-7892PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BRYNER, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

Art Heckman, Fred Lamont, and Martin Kelley (collectively Heckman) engage in commercial or subsistence fishing on the Yukon River drainage; on behalf of themselves and similarly situated resource users, they sued David Mesiar and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (collectively ADF & G) for negligent operation of a sonar fish counter that ADF & G relied on to make fisheries closure decisions for the Yukon River drainage during the 1994 fishing season. The main issues presented are whether ADF & G owes Heckman an actionable duty to use reasonable care…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Adams v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Myers v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1994
  3. Vera Zabala Clemente v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1978
  4. Peter W. v. San Francisco Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  5. D. S. W. ex rel. R. M. W. v. Fairbanks North Star Borough School DistrictAlaska Supreme Court · 1981

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Kallstrom v. United StatesAlaska Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Lynden Inc. v. WalkerAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
  3. State v. SandsnessAlaska Supreme Court · 2003
  4. P.G. v. State, Department of Health & Human Services, Division of Family & Youth ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Parnell v. Peak Oilfield Service Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 2008

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API