Legal Opinion

McConkey v. Hart

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 1997No. S-7154, S-7104PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MATTHEWS, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

This appeal presents a question of interpretation of the prejudgment interest statute, AS 09.30.070, and a question of the appropriateness of awarding prejudgment interest on an award of future damages. The cross-appeal challenges the constitutionality of AS 09.30.070 on equal protection and due process grounds.

II. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

The facts are undisputed. Barbara Hart visited Dr. Sam McConkey, an opthamologist, on October 10, 1990, for an eye exam. Dr. McConkey’s diagnosis was that Hart had a condition known as macular degeneration in her left…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. v. PfeiferSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Beaulieu v. ElliottAlaska Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Isakson v. RickeyAlaska Supreme Court · 1976
  4. State v. PhillipsAlaska Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Langdon v. ChampionAlaska Supreme Court · 1987

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Evans Ex Rel. Kutch v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Grimm v. WagonerAlaska Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Reid v. WilliamsAlaska Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Little Susitna Construction Co. v. Soil Processing, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Liimatta v. VestAlaska Supreme Court · 2002

20 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