33 willoya did not claim that the states action in naming more than three expert witnesses resulted in an undue burden or expense under alaska rule of civil procedure 26c accordingly we do not address the interplay between that rule and evidence rule 702b 34 kendall v state div of corr 692 p2d 953 955 alaska 1984. Willoya v state dept of corr 53 p3d 1115 1125 alaska 2002 10 dewey v dewey 886 p2d 623 626 alaska 1994 3 1716 record as it is before us we discern no abuse of discretion by the superior court and we affirm the superior courts denial of blass motion for relief from judgment . Yaple 234 p3d 1278 1280 alaska 2010 6 willoya v state dept of corr 53 p3d 1115 1119 alaska 2002 8 7327 represent the child without counsel thus the status of these appellants is not entirely clear on the record available to us but judgment was entered against both of them and their arguments are before us . Case opinion for ak supreme court lentine v state read the courts full decision on findlaw. Willoya v state 53 p3d 1115 1118 1121 22 alaska 2002 stating in inmates medical malpractice lawsuit that alaska r evid 706 is a procedural option for a judge when the issues are unusually complex but is not intended as a means for an indigent party to obtain expert testimony at public expense cf alaska admin
How it works:
1. Register a Free 1 month Trial Account.
2. Download as many books as you like ( Personal use )
3. No Commitment. Cancel anytime.
4. Join Over 100.000 Happy Readers.
5. That's it. What you waiting for? Sign Up and Get Your Books.