Opinion ID: 2600066
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The two-year limitation of AS 09.10.070 and the one-year limitation of AS 09.10.090 apply to this action.

Text: The Krauses argue that their claims relate to interests in real property and contend that any of the three statutes of limitations provided by AS 09.10.030 (actions regarding interests in land), AS 09.10.050 (actions for waste or trespass upon real property), or AS 09.10.100 (actions not otherwise provided for) should apply. We conclude that AS 09.10.070 and AS 09.10.090 are the controlling statutes here. The Krauses request relief for injury arising from the inappropriate recording of a plat; nearly all of their claims are properly described as claims for personal injury ... or injury to the rights of another not arising on contract and not specifically provided otherwise. [27] Alaska Statute 09.10.070(a)(5) specifically exempts statutory penalties, which are instead governed by AS 09.10.090, [28] so the Krauses' request for statutory penalties falls under that statute. The Krauses are not seeking the recovery of real property, so the limitations period in AS 09.10.030 does not apply. And the Krauses' cause of action is not based on trespass or waste, so AS 09.10.050 does not apply. Alaska Statute 09.10.100 governs only claims for which no other statute of limitation controls; it does not apply here because we conclude that other statutes provide time limitations for the Krauses' claims. Significantly more than two years passed between the recording of the plat in November 2002 and the filing of the complaint in April 2007. Based on the allegations set forth in the complaint, the superior court's initial ruling dismissing these claims as untimely was correct.