Title: DeNardo v. State

State: alaska

Issuer: Alaska Supreme Court

Document:

887 P.2d 947 (1994) Daniel DeNARDO, Appellant, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee. No. S-5850. Supreme Court of Alaska. December 23, 1994. Daniel DeNardo, pro se. Nancy J. Nolan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Anchorage, Bruce M. Botelho, Atty. Gen., Juneau, for appellee. Before MOORE, C.J., and RABINOWITZ, MATTHEWS, COMPTON and EASTAUGH, JJ. MATTHEWS, Justice. Daniel DeNardo claims interests in five islands which lie north of Siberia in the Arctic Ocean: Wrangel, Herald, Henrietta, Bennett and Jeannette. When he attempted to record these interests in the Nome recording district, the recorder refused to accept DeNardo's documents, taking the position that the islands are not within the Nome recording district. DeNardo sued, seeking equitable relief and damages. He alleged that "[t]he State of Alaska being responsible for the designation of the recording district must designate a place of recordation for plaintiff's property rights as it has recorded other's [sic] property rights in the state of Alaska." The State moved to dismiss, claiming that it lacks authority to designate recording districts for the Arctic Islands. The State's motion was granted. DeNardo appeals. We affirm. The Arctic Islands are not located within the Nome recording district or any of the State's other thirty-three recording districts. Under AS 40.17.020(a), DeNardo's documents may not be recorded in any recording district in Alaska.[1] Moreover, the State has no duty to create a recording district *949 for the Arctic Islands, as it is not governing them. The question of sovereignty over the Arctic Islands is a subject committed to the executive and legislative branches of the United States government. See United States v. Louisiana, 363 U.S. 1, 35, 80 S. Ct. 961, 982, 4 L. Ed. 2d 1096 (1960). Until and unless the United States government indicates that the Arctic Islands are part of the State of Alaska, the State has no duty to accept for recording documents affecting title to real property on the islands.[2] DeNardo claims that his constitutional right to equal protection of the law has been violated. The State discriminated against him since in the past the Nome recorder has accepted documents of title concerning the Arctic Islands. This claim lacks merit. In accepting for recording documents concerning the islands, the State committed an administrative error. Neither the state nor federal constitutions require that this practice continue. See State v. Reefer King Co., Inc., 559 P.2d 56, 65 (Alaska 1976) (stating that "an individual who claims that selective enforcement has deprived him or her of equal protection under the state constitution must show `a deliberate and intentional plan to discriminate,' based upon some unjustifiable or arbitrary classification"). DeNardo claims that he was a public interest litigant; therefore, the award of $1200 in attorney's fees against him should be reversed. DeNardo is not a public interest litigant as he is seeking to further his own alleged interest in the Arctic Islands. He is motivated principally by private rather than public concerns. See Anchorage Daily News v. Anchorage School District, 803 P.2d 402, 404 (Alaska 1990) (articulating public interest litigant criteria). AFFIRMED. Introduced: 2/4/88. [1] AS 40.17.020(a) states that "[a] conveyance that is eligible for recording ... may be recorded only in the records of the recording district in which land affected by the conveyance is located." [2] The historical basis for the United States' claim to the Arctic Island is set forth in Senate Joint Resolution No. 61 of the Second Session of the Fifteenth Alaska Legislature and appended hereto.