Legal Opinion · Dissent

Crawford & Co. v. Baker-Withrow

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided December 19, 2003No. S-10141Published

1DissentFabe, Chief Justice

I disagree with the court's conclusion that the Workers' Compensation Board's post-settlement finding that Crawford and Company frivolously and unfairly controverted Penny Baker-Withrow's claim is a final, appealable order. I depart from the court's reasoning on several grounds. The court has created the right to an appeal that frequently will have no appellee. Furthermore, the Board's finding fails our test for identifying final appealable agency orders because it does not require Crawford to take any action. The finding therefore has no direct effect on the company. And we do not need to be…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Franklin v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. Smither and Company, Inc. v. Franciska T. ColesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1957
  4. Calvin Geyen, Jr. v. John O. Marsh, Jr., Secretary of the United States ArmyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
  5. Matanuska Maid, Inc. v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1980

5 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