Hopper v. Estate of Goard
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BOLGER, Justice.
I. INTRODUCTION
Two co-conservators filed a motion to intervene in a lawsuit involving their ward in order to seek relief from a judgment based on a settlement agreement. The superior court denied the motion, and the co-conservators now appeal. We conclude that the co-conservators were entitled to intervene as a matter of right under Alaska Civil Rule 24 and that the denial of their motion to intervene was not harmless error. Accordingly, we reverse the superior court’s order denying the motion to intervene and remand for further proceedings.
II. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
Terry…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. WeidnerAlaska Supreme Court · 1984
- Alaskans for a Common Language, Inc. v. KritzAlaska Supreme Court · 2000
- Harvey v. CookAlaska Supreme Court · 2007
- Williams v. WilliamsAlaska Supreme Court · 2011
- Mundt v. Northwest Explorations, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1997
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- MMH v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 2017
- Energy Transfer v. ND Private Investigative and Security Bd.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2022
- Joshua M. Martinez & Robert Martinez v. Government Employees Insurance Company, Charles E. Burnett v. Government Employees Insurance CompanyAlaska Supreme Court · 2020
- Oscar M., a Minor v. Marilyn P. and Shawn M.Alaska Supreme Court · 2024