Legal Opinion

Leis v. Hustad

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided May 18, 2001No. S-8775PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

EASTAUGH, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

We address here property characterization and valuation issues arising out of Karen Leis and Robert (Bob) Hustad's divorce proceedings. We conclude that it was error to characterize the Muntean Escrow as Bob's separate property, to value Bob's retirement plan at the time of separation, and to find that the loan from Karen's parents was not a marital liability. We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings. Because correcting these errors may significantly alter the distribution of assets, the superior court may, but is not required to, revisit…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Wanberg v. WanbergAlaska Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Peterson v. WirumAlaska Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Cox v. CoxAlaska Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Ogard v. OgardAlaska Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Doyle v. DoyleAlaska Supreme Court · 1991

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Hanson v. HansonAlaska Supreme Court · 2005
  2. DeNardo v. Calista Corp.Alaska Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Abood v. AboodAlaska Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Riddell v. EdwardsAlaska Supreme Court · 2003
  5. Carr v. CarrAlaska Supreme Court · 2007

10 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