Legal Opinion

Hallam v. Holland America Line, Inc.

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided August 3, 2001No. S-9144PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

EASTAUGH, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

We consider here various procedural issues arising from a former employee's contract and Alaska Wage and Hour Act claims. We affirm the denial of class certification to Stuart Hallam as a pro se representative of the class, but remand for consideration of his undecided motion for class certification conditioned on obtaining counsel. Because there are genuine issues of material fact, we reverse the grant of summary judgment and remand for further proceedings. We also conclude that it was error to deny the motions to amend the complaint.

II. FACTS AND…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Zeman v. Lufthansa German AirlinesAlaska Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Jager v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Moran v. HolmanAlaska Supreme Court · 1972
  4. State v. Marathon Oil CompanyAlaska Supreme Court · 1974
  5. Betz v. Chena Hot Springs GroupAlaska Supreme Court · 1987

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Pouzanova v. MortonAlaska Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Smith v. KofstadAlaska Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Hallam v. Holland America Line, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Lot 04B & 5C, Block 83 Townsite v. Fairbanks North Star BoroughAlaska Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Amos v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2002

2 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