Legal Opinion · Dissent

Brown v. Lange

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 2001No. S-8745Published

1DissentBryner, Justice

I agree that Brown's call to Lange's attorney did not amount to a Rule 55 "appearance" but disagree with the court's conclusion that Lange's attorney had no duty to notify Brown of his intent to apply for entry of default. In my view, this court's caselaw *829obliged Lange's attorney to inform Brown of the impending default.

Cook v. Aurora Motors, Inc. was the first of our cases to recognize an attorney's professional duty to give reasonable notice to an opposing party before applying for a default.1 As the court's opinion today correctly notes,2 Cook drew this duty from the American College of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Smith v. JohnstonIndiana Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Hertz v. BerzanskeAlaska Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Hartwell v. MarquezWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Cook v. Aurora Motors, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1972
  5. Bellm v. BelliaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984

3 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