In the Matter of Kristine A. Schmidt, Regarding Sanctions Imposed in Koivisto v. Koivisto

114 P.3d 816 (Alaska 2005) · Supreme Court of Alaska · June 24, 2005 · No. S-11427

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court reviewed sanctions and attorney-fee awards imposed on attorney Kristine A. Schmidt after she filed a post-trial brief after a court-ordered deadline. The court affirmed the award of fees associated with the opposing party’s reply brief under Alaska Civil Rule 95(a), but vacated a conflicting order that denied acceptance of the late brief and awarded fees for the opposing party’s original brief. The court also addressed notice, due process, and the superior court’s authority to enforce briefing deadlines.

Holdings

  1. A superior court may assess attorney's fees and costs against an attorney under Alaska Civil Rule 95(a) when the attorney violates an enforceable court-ordered briefing deadline, even if the court accepts the late filing.
  2. Any deficiency in advance notice or a pre-sanction opportunity to be heard was harmless because Schmidt had notice of Koivisto's fee request and an opportunity to challenge the sanction through reconsideration.
  3. The superior court abused its discretion by entering an unexplained order that contradicted its prior acceptance of the late brief and awarded fees for costs Koivisto would have incurred regardless of the late filing.
  4. The later decision adopting the master's recommendation that each party pay its own attorney's fees did not supersede the earlier sanction requiring Schmidt to pay the fees associated with Koivisto's reply brief.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Alaska Civil Rule 95(a) authorized the superior court to assess attorney's fees and costs against Schmidt for filing a post-trial brief after a court-ordered deadline.
  2. Whether the superior court's award of fees under Civil Rule 95(a) violated Schmidt's procedural due process rights because she was not given advance notice and a pre-sanction hearing.
  3. Whether the superior court abused its discretion by entering a later order rejecting Schmidt's late-filed brief and awarding fees for Koivisto's original post-trial brief after previously accepting the late brief and authorizing a reply.
  4. Whether the later superior court order that each party pay its own attorney's fees superseded the earlier sanction award for the reply brief.

Disposition

remanded

Cases Cited (17)

  • McNett v. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co., 856 P.2d 1165 (Alaska 1993)(followed)
  • Keen v. Ruddy, 784 P.2d 653 (Alaska 1989)(followed)
  • Doe v. State, Department of Public Safety, 92 P.3d 398 (Alaska 2004)(followed)
  • Paxton v. Gavlak, 100 P.3d 7 (Alaska 2004)(followed)
  • S.S.M. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services, Division of Family & Youth Services, 3 P.3d 342 (Alaska 2000)(followed)
  • State, Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission v. Carlson, 65 P.3d 851 (Alaska 2003)(followed)
  • Wilson v. Municipality of Anchorage, 977 P.2d 713 (Alaska 1999)(distinguished)
  • State v. 1.163 Acres, More or Less, Chuckwm, Inc., 449 P.2d 776 (Alaska 1968)(followed)
  • Sheehan v. University of Alaska, 700 P.2d 1295 (Alaska 1985)(followed)
  • Esch v. Superior Court, Third Judicial District, 577 P.2d 1039 (Alaska 1978)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 17.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Download CaseDownload Case DataDownload Case and DataDownload AI Instructions

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Alaska Supreme Court