Legal Opinion

Diksen v. Troxell

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided May 9, 1997No. S-6538Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MATTHEWS, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

A transferor of a limited entry permit may not retain a property interest in the permit. Diksen sued Troxell for money owed under an oral transfer agreement. Troxell obtained summary judgment on the ground that the agreement was a lease and thus illegal. A lease must have a retransfer term. Because there is a fact issue as to whether the agreement contained a term under which Troxell would retransfer the permit, we reverse.

II. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

Sonja Diksen is the mother of four children, Corinna, Shannon, Troy, and Katrina. Prior to 1988, Diksen was…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In Re PeacockUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · 1980
  2. Transamerica Leasing Corp. v. Bureau of RevenueNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1969
  3. Glenn P. Maulding v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1958
  4. Bruton v. Automatic Welding & Supply CorporationAlaska Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Kos v. WilliamsAlaska Supreme Court · 1980

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API