Legal Opinion · Dissent

M.B. v. State

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided August 9, 1996No. S-6388Published

1DissentRabinowitz, Justice

I think that the State’s motion “for a finding that [Mark Bridge] is not the father of [Johnny Bridge]” must be analyzed as a motion for summary judgment. Merely casting the subject motion as one seeking a particular finding should not enable the State to circumvent established procedures applicable to summary judgment motions.

One should not lose sight of the fact that if Mark had not opposed in any fashion the State’s disguised summary judgment motion, the State would still have no right to an automatic grant of summary judgment, but rather would have the obligation of establishing its…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
  2. People v. CastroNew York Supreme Court · 1989
  3. State v. SchwartzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  4. Pulakis v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Contreras v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1986

7 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