Legal Opinion

Ko-Am Enterprises v. Davis

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided January 14, 1983No. 6268PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

COMPTON, Justice.

The primary issue presented in this appeal is what the appropriate remedy should be when an action is commenced in the wrong judicial district. For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that unless the superior court finds that the plaintiff acted in bad faith, or unless the interests of justice otherwise dictate, the appropriate remedy is to transfer the action to the judicial district of proper venue, rather than to dismiss the action.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The complaint filed by Appellant Ko-Am Enterprises (hereinafter referred to as “Ko-Am”) arose…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Goldlawr, Inc. v. HeimanSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Suttle v. Reich Bros. Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
  3. Aleut Corp. v. RogersAlaska Supreme Court · 1980

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Sheehan v. University of AlaskaAlaska Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Ketchikan General Hospital v. DunnaganAlaska Supreme Court · 1988
  3. North Slope Borough, Department of Administration & Finance, Tax Audit Division v. Green International, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Anderson v. W. Hodgeman & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1994
  5. Anderson v. W. Hodgeman & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1994

3 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