Legal Opinion

Osbourne v. Buckman

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided December 3, 1999No. S-8466PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MATTHEWS, Chief Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

James and Janice Osborne brought suit to quiet title to property in Soldotna. They later amended their complaint to include a claim for judicial foreclosure of a deed of trust covering the property. Kevin Buckman answered, contending that the statute of limitations barred the Osbornes’ suit. The superior court granted Buckman’s motion for summary judgment on reconsideration, and the Osbornes appeal. Because a bankruptcy stay tolled the statute of limitations, the Os-bornes’ judicial foreclosure suit is timely. We therefore reverse the grant of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Davis v. DykmanAlaska Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Jackinsky v. JackinskyAlaska Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Tolstrup v. MillerAlaska Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Dworkin v. First National Bank of FairbanksAlaska Supreme Court · 1968
  5. Moening v. Alaska Mutual BankAlaska Supreme Court · 1988

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Beegan v. State, Department of Transportation & Public FacilitiesAlaska Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Robertson v. American Mechanical, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Hurd v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2005
  4. McDowell v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2001
  5. Bank of America, N.A. v. BlasDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API