Legal Opinion
Waiste v. State
Alaska Supreme Court
Decided October 13, 2000No. S-8068PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
COMPTON, Justice.
I. INTRODUCTION
John Waiste and George Ryan (collectively, Waiste) appeal a summary judgment that the State of Alaska does not owe them compensation for its ex parte seizure and retention of their fishing boat during a criminal prosecution and civil in rem forfeiture action based on a violation of fishing regulations. This appeal presents three principal issues. First, does due process require that the State, in every case in which it shows probable cause that a boat has been used in a fishing violation, either afford a hearing or show that exigent cireumstances justify…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Cleveland Board of Education v. LoudermillSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. McGrathSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- State, Department of Revenue v. AndradeAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
- Hageland Aviation Services, Inc. v. HarmsAlaska Supreme Court · 2009
- State, Department of Natural Resources v. Greenpeace, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2004
- Kanuk Ex Rel. Kanuk v. State, Department of Natural ResourcesAlaska Supreme Court · 2014
- Diaz v. State, Department of CorrectionsAlaska Supreme Court · 2010
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.