Legal Opinion

State of Alaska, Department of Revenue, Child Support Enforcement Division Ex Rel. Constance L. Gause, v. Thomas Gause

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided November 20, 1998No. S-7953PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FABE, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

In an effort to collect child support arrears owed by Thomas Gause, the Child Support Enforcement Division (CSED) filed a motion under AS 25.27.226 seeking to establish a judgment for the past due payments. The superior court denied the motion, ruling that it was barred by the statute of limitations set out in AS 09.10.040(b), which applies to “actions.” In State ex rel. Inman v. Dean,1 we held that AS 25.27.226 motions to collect child support arrears do not qualify as “actions.” The legislature’s view to the contrary, as expressed in § .040(b), was based…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. City of Fairbanks v. SchaibleAlaska Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Scheele v. City of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 1963
  3. State, Department of Revenue, Child Support Enforcement Division, Ex Rel. Valdez v. ValdezAlaska Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Karpuleon v. KarpuleonAlaska Supreme Court · 1994
  5. State, Department of Revenue, Child Support Enforcement Division Ex Rel. Inman v. DeanAlaska Supreme Court · 1995

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Paxton v. GavlakAlaska Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Magden v. Alaska USA Federal Credit UnionAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
  3. Koss v. KossAlaska Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Murphy v. NewlynnAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Whalen v. WhalenAlaska Supreme Court · 2018

2 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