In Re the Protective Proceedings of W.A.
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION CARPENETI, Justice.
I. INTRODUCTION
The respondent in a guardianship proceeding appeals the superior court's appointment of a permanent guardian. He argues that the superior court was not presented with clear and convincing evidence that (1) he is totally incapacitated and (2) alternatives to guardianship are not feasible. Because the superior court did not err in finding that there was clear and convincing evidence that the respondent is incapacitated and that alternatives to guardianship are not feasible, we affirm the decision of the superior court.
II. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
This case…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Adamson v. University of AlaskaAlaska Supreme Court · 1991
- Casey v. Semco Energy, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2004
- H.C.S. v. Community Advocacy Project of Alaska, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2002
- Matter of OSDAlaska Supreme Court · 1983
3Cited by30 opinions
- Barnett v. BarnettAlaska Supreme Court · 2010
- Day v. WilliamsAlaska Supreme Court · 2012
- Williams v. GEICO Casualty Co.Alaska Supreme Court · 2013
- Christianson v. Conrad-Houston InsuranceAlaska Supreme Court · 2014
- Lindbo v. Colaska, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2018
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.