Great Western Sav. v. George W. Easley

12 Citing cases

  1. Polar Envtl. Techs. v. Rust-Oleum Corp.

    4:20-cv-00017-HRH (D. Alaska Aug. 4, 2022)

    A plaintiff must also show that they suffered damages. See Great W. Sav. Bank v. George W. Easley Co., 778 P.2d 569, 577-78 (Alaska 1989) (holding that alleging a contractual obligation, a breach of that obligation, and a suffering of damages is sufficient under Alaska's notice-pleading standard to state a claim for breach of contract and survive a motion to dismiss). Whether a breach of contract has occurred is a question of fact.

  2. Sykes v. Melba Creek Min., Inc.

    952 P.2d 1164 (Alaska 1998)   Cited 40 times
    Holding that argument briefed in cursory manner and without citing supporting authority is considered abandoned

    However, Alaska is a notice pleading state. Alaska R. Civ. P. 8(a); see also Great Western Savings Bank v. George W. Easley Co., 778 P.2d 569, 577 (Alaska 1989). Civil Rule 8(a) requires only a "short and plain statement of the claim" that will give the defendant fair notice of the claim and the grounds upon which it rests. Great Western, 778 P.2d at 577.

  3. Ellison v. Hawthorne

    548 F. App'x 371 (9th Cir. 2013)

    Although the district court determined there was no genuine issue of material fact relevant to whether Hawthorne had acted willfully or maliciously, these are not elements of an unfitness of premises or breach of contract claim. See Newton v. Magill, 872 P.2d 1213, 1217 (Alaska 1994) (requiring "reasonable care" for actions under A.S. § 34.03.100); Great W. Sav. Bank v. George W. Easley Co. J.V., 778 P.2d 569, 577-78 (Alaska 1989) (breach of contract action). For purposes of adjudicating Ellison's claim, it is irrelevant that Ellison would need to establish these elements to ensure that any damage award would be nondischargeable in bankruptcy.

  4. Sivil v. Country Mut. Ins. Co.

    619 F. Supp. 3d 1072 (D. Nev. 2022)   Cited 1 times
    Analyzing this question and holding that the Nevada Supreme Court would find that courts should determine which state's law applies on an issue-by-issue or claim-by-claim basis rather than making a blanket decision to cover all claims

    But she does not identify a contractual provision that requires the insurer to so explain its coverages and limitations to her, and indeed there appears to be none in the agreement.Great W. Sav. Bank v. George W. Easley Co., J.V., 778 P.2d 569, 577 (Alaska 1989). ECF No. 25 at ¶¶ 13-20.

  5. 2002 Lawrence R. Buchalter Alaska Trust v. Phila. Fin. Life Assurance Co.

    96 F. Supp. 3d 182 (S.D.N.Y. 2015)   Cited 60 times
    Finding that the plaintiffs failed to state a negligence claim where they did "not allege[] the breach of a legal duty independent from [d]efendant's contractual obligations"

    Under Alaska law, “[i]n order to assert a claim for breach of contract, a plaintiff must generally allege: (1) the existence of a contract; (2) breach; (3) causation; and (4) damages.” Nicdao v. Chase Home Fin., 839 F.Supp.2d 1051, 1068 (D.Alaska 2012) (citing Great W. Sav. Bank v. George W. Easley Co., 778 P.2d 569, 577–78 (Alaska 1989) ; Winn v. Mannhalter, 708 P.2d 444, 450 (Alaska 1985) ). Under New York law, the elements of a cause of action for breach of contract are “(1) the existence of a contract between [the plaintiff] and [the] defendant; (2) performance of the plaintiff's obligations under the contract; (3) breach of the contract by [the] defendant; and (4) damages to the plaintiff caused by [the] defendant's breach.

  6. G4i Consulting, Inc. v. Nana Servs., LLC

    1:11CV810 (LMB/TCB) (E.D. Va. May. 14, 2012)   Cited 2 times

    To assert a claim for breach of contract under Alaska law, a plaintiff must allege: (1) existence of a contract; (2) breach; (3) causation; and (4) damages. Nicdao v. Chase Home Fin., No. 3:10-cv-00192-TMB, 2012 WL 882550, at * 8 (D. Alaska Mar. 13, 2012) (citing Great W. Sav. Bank v. George W. Easley Co., 778 P.2d 569, 577-78 (Alaska 1989)). 1. Plaintiff's Claim for One Percent of Gross Revenues

  7. Nicdao v. Chase Home Fin.

    839 F. Supp. 2d 1051 (D. Alaska 2012)   Cited 17 times
    Discussing the requirements for showing unjust enrichment under Alaska law, and stating that “[g]enerally, a[p]laintiff may not rely on a theory of implied contract where a valid, express contract governs” (second alteration in original)

    The existence of a contract, in turn, requires “an offer including all essential terms, an unequivocal acceptance of those terms by the offeree, consideration, and an intent to be bound by the contract....” See Great W. Sav. Bank v. George W. Easley Co., 778 P.2d 569, 577–78 (Alaska 1989) (finding that a complaint was sufficient where it alleged that the parties had a contractual obligation, that the other party breached the contract, and that the plaintiff suffered damages); Winn v. Mannhalter, 708 P.2d 444, 450 (Alaska 1985) (“Causation is a required element in an action for breach of contract”); cf., e.g., Ledcor Indus. (USA) Inc. v. Virginia Surety Co., No. C09–1807RSM, 2011 WL 6140957, at *7 (W.D.Wash. Dec. 9, 2011) (stating that under Washington law, “The elements of a cause of action for breach of contract are: (1) the existence of a legal duty under the contract; (2) breach of that duty; and (3) damages proximately caused by the breach.” (citation omitted)); Gray v. Carolina Energy Solutions, LLC, No. CV–10–0698–PHX–NVW, 2010 WL 2691563, at *5 (D.Ariz. July 6, 2010) (“To establish a claim for breach of contract in Arizona, a plaintiff must prove the existence of an enforceable contract, a breach of that contract, and damages caused by the breach.”

  8. St. Denis v. Dept. of Housing and Urban Develop.

    900 F. Supp. 1194 (D. Alaska 1995)   Cited 12 times

    That claim, however, would be litigated in the court of claims, not this Court. It is less clear but likely that she would have a separate claim for misrepresentation either in equity for restitution or at law for negligent or fraudulent misrepresentation. See ARCO Alaska, Inc. v. Akers, 753 P.2d 1150, 1153 (Alaska 1988); Great Western Sav. Bank v. George W. Easley Co., 778 P.2d 569, 580-81 (Alaska 1989); Turnbull v. LaRose, 702 P.2d 1331, 1334 (Alaska 1985) (non-disclosure). The United States has not consented to be sued for such claims.

  9. Valdez Fisheries Dev. v. Alyeska Pipeline Ser

    45 P.3d 657 (Alaska 2002)   Cited 54 times
    Holding statement of intent "to begin the process of negotiating a contract as soon as possible" was not enforceable as promise to negotiate

    We rejected that argument, unequivocally ruling that Civil Rule 8 does not require a complaint to affirmatively plead contract elements: 778 P.2d 569 (Alaska 1989).Id. at 577-78.

  10. Alaska Continental, Inc. v. Trickey

    933 P.2d 528 (Alaska 1997)   Cited 15 times
    Holding that contract to provide borrower with funds to pay his debts did not give creditors right to enforce contract as third-party beneficiaries since rights vest in creditor only when lender promises to make payment directly to creditor; borrower's intervening agency disrupted any relationship between creditor and lender

    Cases cited by ACI II are consistent with this conclusion. ACI II contends that Great Western Sav. Bank v. George W. Easley Co., 778 P.2d 569 (Alaska 1989), establishes its third party beneficiary status. In that case, we did hold that the defendant lender's loan to a borrower created enforceable rights in a third party creditor.