Legal Opinion

McDowell v. State

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 1989No. S-2732PublishedCited by 66 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MATTHEWS, Chief Justice.

INTRODUCTION

This case challenges chapter 52 SLA 1986 which grants a preference to rural residents to take fish and game for subsistence purposes. The only requirement to be met by a subsistence fisherman or hunter is residency in a rural area of the state.

The rural preference is challenged under several provisions of the Alaska Constitution: the common use clause, article VIII, section 3; the no exclusive right of fishery clause, article VIII, section 15; the uniform application clause, article VIII, section 17; the equal rights clause, article I, section 1; and…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Geer v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  2. Martin v. Lessee of WaddellSupreme Court of the United States · 1842
  3. Hynes, Regional Director, Fish & Wildlife Service v. Grimes Packing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
  4. State v. OstroskyAlaska Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Harper v. GallowaySupreme Court of Florida · 1909

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

3Cited by66 opinions

  1. Peninsula Marketing Ass'n v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Gilbert v. State, Department of Fish & Game, Board of FisheriesAlaska Supreme Court · 1990
  3. Totemoff v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Ninilchik Traditional Council Jack Kvasnikoff, Jr. v. United States of America Bruce BabbittCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
  5. Baxley v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1998

61 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