Attorney Peggy Roston's Legal Cases

Child support

Wessels v. Wessels, MOJ, 1999 WL 33958790, (Alaska 1999) (NO. S-8125)

Apr 14, 1999

OUTCOME: The Court affirmed the decision below.

This case involved issues regarding deviating from the shared child support formula found in Civil Rule 90.3(b) to take into account the disparity in the parties’ respective incomes – father made more ... than mother – and in mother’s expenses for their son, including child care and hockey expenses. The trial court both parties’ motions. The mother appealed. The AK Supreme Court affirmed the trial court decision denying mother’s motion. The Court stated that the shared custody calculation ( mother had son 60% of the time) factored in the disparity in the parties’ income and the disparity was not so great as to justify devating from the shared child support formula found in Civil Rule 90.3(b). The court also noted that the mother’s expenses for their son had decreased since the divorce.

Child custody

Gaston v. Gaston, 954 P.2d 572 (Alaska 1998)

Feb 20, 1998

OUTCOME: Reversed and Remanded.

This appeal concerns a dispute between Samuel and Susan Gaston over child visitation privileges. The Gastons signed a custody agreement that allowed them to change the physical custody arrangement afte ... r one year. The custody agreement also provided that if the Gastons disagreed on proposed changes, they could seek mediation or court modification. Nine months after they signed the agreement, the Gastons adopted a slightly modified visitation schedule. Approximately one year later, Susan decided that the new arrangement was not in the children's best interests and informed Samuel that she wanted to return to the original schedule. Because Samuel wanted to retain the new visitation schedule, he filed a motion in the superior court requesting mediation or court modification, as provided for in the custody agreement. The superior court denied Samuel's request, ruling in part that the agreement's mediation provision had lapsed. Because they concluded that Susan was stopped from arguing that the provision had lapsed, the court reversed.

Land use and zoning

Kenai Peninsula Borough v. Cook Inlet Region, Inc., 807 P.2d 487 (Alaska 1991)

Mar 15, 1991

OUTCOME: See: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1454416/kenai-peninsula-bor-v-cook-inlet-reg/?q=cites%3A(1424567)

The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), 43 U.S.C. §§ 1601-1628 (1982), extinguished all claims of the Native people of Alaska based on aboriginal title in exchange for 962.5 million dollars an ... d 44 million acres of public land. See United States v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 612 F.2d 1132, 1134 (9th Cir.1980). The act authorized the creation of 13 regional and over 200 village corporations to receive this money and land. In enacting ANCSA, Congress declared as a policy that "the settlement should be accomplished ... without adding to the categories of properties and institutions enjoying special tax privileges... ." 43 U.S.C. § 1601(b). Congress did, however, provide for an exemption from real property taxation for lands conveyed under the act. The exemption was limited in time to 20 years, and in content to lands "which are not developed or leased to third parties." 43 U.S.C. § 1620(d)(1). This case concerns the meaning of the term "developed" in the act.

Tax

Kenai Peninsula Borough v. Tyonek Native Corp., 807 P.2d 502 (Alaska 1991)

Mar 15, 1991

OUTCOME: Court rules that the property is developed and therefore taxable moots the borough's appeal concerning its Rule 60(b) motion. REVERSED and REMANDED.

The Kenai Peninsula Borough (borough) appeals from a decision of the superior court which ruled that a tax parcel owned by the Tyonek Native Corporation (Tyonek) was exempt from taxation for ... 1985.

Real estate

Rainier Fund, Inc. v. Blomfield Real Estate Co., 717 P.2d 850 ( Alaska 1986)

Mar 11, 1986

OUTCOME: cased affirmed.

This is an appeal by The Ranier Fund, Inc. (TRF) from a jury verdict awarding John Blomfield (Blomfield) $160,000 for breach of a real estate brokerage agreement. TRF challenges Judge Brian C. Shortell ... 's denial of its motions for summary judgment, directed verdict, judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and new trial. Court affirms.

Divorce and separation

MILLER V. MILLER, S-11625 (ALASKA 2006)

Nov 08, 0206

OUTCOME: Superior court's judgment AFFIRMED.

Mark and Judith Miller married in April 1974. In the fall of 1999 Judith moved from Anchorage to Oakland, California to begin a three-year graduate degree program. Mark filed for divorce in December 20 ... 01. At trial over the division of marital property, the court determined that the date of separation was October 1, 2001 — when Mark and Judith actually decided to divorce. Mark now appeals the trial court's ruling, arguing that the court should have set the date of separation at September 1, 1999 — when Judith left Anchorage to attend school in California. Because the trial court did not clearly err in its factual findings on separation and because those findings support the court's decision, the Alaska Supreme Court found no abuse of discretion in its determination of the separation date.

Child custody

Beaudoin v. Beaudoin, 24 P.3d 523, 2001 (Alaska 2001)

Jun 15, 0201

OUTCOME: The superior court's 1998 orders denying Michael's motion for a hearing on voluntary underemployment and establishing his child support obligation are VACATED. This case is REMANDED for further proceedings as directed in this opinion.

Five years after dissolving their marriage, Georgia and Michael Beaudoin modified their child custody agreement. Under the original custody order Georgia had sole custody of the couple's three children ... ; as a full-time parent she did not have a job outside the home. Under the new agreement Michael became the primary custodian: he took sole custody of one child and shared equal custody of the other two on an alternating-week schedule. After the superior court approved this agreement, Michael moved for an order establishing Georgia's support obligation. Contending that Georgia was voluntarily underemployed, he asked the court to impute Georgia's income based on her earning capacity. The court denied these requests without an evidentiary hearing, ruling that, since Georgia had never held a paying job and her situation remained unchanged, the undisputed evidence failed to establish voluntary underemployment. Court reversed. Because Michael offered evidence that Georgia was employable but chose not to work, Michael's claim of voluntary underemployment required an evidentiary hearing.

Peggy Roston's Legal Cases (17)