Legal Opinion

Spenard Action Committee v. Lot 3, Block 1, Evergreen Subdivision

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided August 25, 1995No. S-5758, S-5797PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RABINOWITZ, Justice.

Spenard Action Committee (SAC) instituted an action for abatement of a public nuisance and injunctive relief against Lot 3, Block 1, Evergreen Subdivision (Lot 3), alleging that The Chateau, a massage parlor and escort service located on the property, was operating as a house of prostitution. The superior court denied relief based on its conclusion that SAC had not shown that a public nuisance existed at the time of trial.

On appeal, SAC first argues that the superior court should have established as a matter of law, as a sanction for Lot 3’s alleged discovery…

2Cases cited56 opinions

  1. United States v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
  2. United States v. Aluminum Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945
  3. United States v. Leslie Fleishman, United States of America v. Peter Combs, United States of America v. Stephen GreenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
  4. United States v. Ronald BrownCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
  5. John David v. The Hooker, Ltd Hooker Music, Ltd., Ronald Haffkine, Non-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Evans v. McTaggartAlaska Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Fernandes v. PortwineAlaska Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Sykes v. Melba Creek Mining, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Rausch v. DevineAlaska Supreme Court · 2003
  5. City of Kodiak v. SamaniegoAlaska Supreme Court · 2004

29 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