Source: http://www.touchngo.com/sp/html/sp-7218.htm
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 15:02:08+00:00

Document:
Judicial District, Cordova, Daniel Schally, Judge pro tem.
Anchorage,  Appellants.                      Holly  C.  Wells  and  Jack  R.
left-behind property and the amount still owing on the judgment.
court found the city's response sufficient and allowed execution to continue.
remand for further proceedings in the superior court.
Cordova   in   1997  to  operate   a   marine   fueling   facility   on   City-owned   land.
clerk of court issued writs of execution.
judgment still unpaid, the City ceased its collection efforts.
advertisements, and "dates of sales [of] any and all property seized and sold by the City."
The City did not respond, so the Beechers retained a lawyer and repeated their request.
excavator, and other pieces of equipment," and asked, "What happened to these items?
again shows no response from the City.
property listed in the creditor's affidavit had been foreclosed upon by other lenders.
by the City as the City's accounting has been limited [to] its own records."
of the Beechers' personal property.
director's affidavit "provided a satisfactory accounting of[theCity's]collectionefforts,"
We review questions of law using our independent judgment.
it took possession of these items without crediting the Beechers for their value.
property; it was then the City's burden to produce evidence accounting for it.
2            State v. Schmidt              , 323 P.3d 647, 655 (Alaska 2014).
Id. (quoting Fred Meyer of Alaska, Inc., 100 P.3d at 883-84).
A.                It Was Error To Find The City's Accounting Satisfactory.
To shift this burden, the moving party must show that "a relationship exists"
balance is due . . . that can only be ascertained by an accounting."
(Cal. App. 2009);                               Failor v. MegaDyne Med. Prods., Inc.                                                                 , 213 P.3d 899, 905 (Utah App.
6                 Garcia, 351 F.3d at 641 (quoting Rosenak, 290 F.2d at 750).
ITKIN, C              ALIFORNIA  PROCEDURE   § 819 (5th ed.
Garcia, 351 F.3d at 641.
accounting does not eliminate the need to account where a duty to account exists."
(Colo. App. 1983);  2416 Corp. v. First Nat'l Bank of Chi., 415 N.E.2d 420, 434 (Ill.
apparent counterparts on the City attorney's list.
after the City took possession of the leased premises.
12	           Teselle, 92 Cal. Rptr. 3d at 716.
we therefore do not consider it.
required  to execute against their personal property.
extent that justice so requires."
when considering estoppel against a municipality."
15                     Jamison v. Consol. Utils., Inc.                                                                                 , 576 P.2d 97, 102 (Alaska 1978).
(citing Glover v. Sager, 667 P.2d 1198, 1202 (Alaska 1983)).
previously taken in the same litigation "as to make the present claim unconscionable."
There is evidence to support a finding that the City "asserted a position"
role in the litigation and collection efforts.
interests of justice, and unconscionability elements of the estoppel doctrines.
19         Jamison, 576 P.2d at 102                    (quoting  Fast v. Fast             , 496 P.2d 171, 175 (Kan.
decision to lift the stay.

References: v. 
 v. 
 § 819
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.