James E. Stokes and Arlene Green v. A. Van Book Reviews

James E. Stokes and Arlene Green v. A. Van by Supreme Court of Alaska Book Summary

AREND, Associate Justice. The basic problem here is whether the courts of Alaska may by interlocutory order or provisional remedy require the defendants in an ejectment action to pay into the registry of the court, pending judgment, a reasonable monthly rental for their use of the property in litigation. We say, no. Before elaborating on our answer, however, we need to consider first a procedural question involved, and that is whether such an order is an appealable order. A brief summary of the facts of the case will simplify our treatment of the problems presented. On October 10, 1958, the plaintiffs-appellees started an action in ejectment in the District Court for the District (Territory) of Alaska, Third Judicial Division against the defendants who are the appellants herein. The complaint contains the usual allegations of ownership, ouster and damage, followed by a prayer that the plaintiffs be restored to possession with damages for the withholding of such possession. In addition the plaintiffs set forth what they consider to be the reasonable rental value of the subject property and ask the court to require the defendants to pay such rent pendente lite.

👋 Do you love James E. Stokes and Arlene Green v. A. Van books? Please share your friends!

James E. Stokes and Arlene Green v. A. Van (Supreme Court of Alaska) Book Reviews 2024

Supreme Court of Alaska - James E. Stokes and Arlene Green v. A. Van Discussions & Comments

Have you read this book yet? What do you think about James E. Stokes and Arlene Green v. A. Van by Supreme Court of Alaska book? Ask the bookpedia.co community a question about James E. Stokes and Arlene Green v. A. Van!