Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gilstrap v. International Contractors Inc.

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided August 13, 1993No. S-5008Published

1DissentBurke, Justice

I respectfully dissent from the court’s decision to reverse and remand this case for further proceedings. In order to resolve the valuation issue, I believe this court must first determine which party carried the burden of proving the value of the meals provided at Hidden Falls — Gilstrap or his employer. In Brunke v. Rogers & Babler, 714 P.2d 795, 801 (Alaska 1986), we held that “it was not an unreasonable or unfair burden” to require the employee to produce evidence of post-injury earnings. We noted that the employee is generally in the best position to produce this information. Id.

In this…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hartland v. HartlandAlaska Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Interior Paint Company v. RodgersAlaska Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Miles v. MilesAlaska Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Wickwire v. City & Borough of JuneauAlaska Supreme Court · 1976
  5. Wien Air Alaska v. KramerAlaska Supreme Court · 1991

4 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