From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Dupere

Supreme Court of Alaska
Jul 11, 1986
721 P.2d 638 (Alaska 1986)

Summary

stating that claimants against the state do not have a right to trial de novo, but Appellate Rule 609 gives the superior court discretion to order a trial de novo

Summary of this case from Bartley v. State, Department of Admin

Opinion

Nos. S-620, S-640.

July 11, 1986.

Appeal from the Juneau Superior Court, Walter L. Carpeneti, J.

Virginia B. Ragle, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Harold M. Brown, Atty. Gen., Juneau, for appellants/cross-appellees.

Loren Domke, Juneau, for appellee/cross-appellant.

Before RABINOWITZ, C.J., and BURKE, MATTHEWS, COMPTON and MOORE, JJ.


OPINION ON REHEARING


The State petitions for rehearing from our decision in State v. Dupere, 709 P.2d 493 (Alaska 1985), urging us to reconsider our statement that Dupere would still have a "right to a de novo trial under AS 09.50.250 if he disagreed with the administrative decision and brought suit within thirty days of the decision." Id. at 497. We granted the petition and now modify our opinion.

The statement quoted above is inconsistent with our holding in State v. Lundgren Pacific Construction, 603 P.2d 889 (Alaska 1979). In Lundgren we held that former Appellate Rule 45 applied to a claim filed in superior court after an adjudication before a contract claims review board and that such an action should be treated as an appeal of an agency decision. Id. at 892-93. Therefore, we take this opportunity to modify our opinion in this case as follows:

Former Appellate Rule 45 is now found in Appellate Rules 602 and 604. These rules govern the time, notice, and record of an appeal.

It would be inefficient to annul the results of the trial and send Dupere back to the administrative level. Although Dupere would have been required to develop the facts of the claim during the administrative proceeding, the superior court would have had the discretion to order a trial de novo under Alaska Appellate Rule 609.

This passage replaces the sentence at 709 P.2d at 497 which reads:

It would be inefficient to annul the results of the trial and send Dupere back to the administrative level, since he would still have the right to a de novo trial under AS 09.50.250 if he disagreed with the administrative decision and brought suit within thirty days of the decision. AS 44.77.040(c).


Summaries of

State v. Dupere

Supreme Court of Alaska
Jul 11, 1986
721 P.2d 638 (Alaska 1986)

stating that claimants against the state do not have a right to trial de novo, but Appellate Rule 609 gives the superior court discretion to order a trial de novo

Summary of this case from Bartley v. State, Department of Admin

noting the superior court's discretion to order a trial de novo in the review of a governmental agency determination

Summary of this case from Eufemio v. Kodiak Island Hosp
Case details for

State v. Dupere

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF ALASKA, HUGH MALONE, IN HIS CAPACITY AS STATE REPRESENTATIVE AND…

Court:Supreme Court of Alaska

Date published: Jul 11, 1986

Citations

721 P.2d 638 (Alaska 1986)

Citing Cases

Tommy's Elbow Room, Inc. v. Kavorkian

The question of whether the superior court erred in refusing to reduce the Kavorkians' claims against Tommy's…

State v. Planned Parenthood of Alaska

As the California Supreme Court observed in rejecting nearly identical restrictions on abortion funding, the…