Legal Opinion

Jerue v. Millett

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided March 28, 2003No. S-9076PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION *

EASTAUGH, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

This appeal concerns attorney's fees and indemnification disputes arising after the superior court dismissed a derivative suit brought by shareholders of an Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) village corporation. The plaintiffs sued without first making the pre-suit demand Alaska law requires. After the superior court dismissed the complaint for mootness, both sides sought attorney's fees and costs. Concluding that the shareholders did not prove that a pre-suit demand was excused, the superior court held that they were not prevailing parties…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Buckhannon Board & Care Home, Inc. v. West Virginia Dept. of Health and Human ResourcesSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  2. Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
  3. Aronson v. LewisSupreme Court of Delaware · 1984
  4. Brehm v. EisnerSupreme Court of Delaware · 2000
  5. Guin v. HaAlaska Supreme Court · 1979

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. McDonnell v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance CompanyAlaska Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Interior Cabaret, Hotel, Restaurant & Retailers Ass'n v. Fairbanks North Star BoroughAlaska Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium v. Settlement Funds Ex Rel. E.R.Alaska Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Halloran v. State, Division of ElectionsAlaska Supreme Court · 2005
  5. Hertz v. BeachAlaska Supreme Court · 2009

6 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