Opinion ID: 1198268
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The State Brought Its Action within the Applicable Limitation Period.

Text: Agen also argues that the Consent to Adoption evidences a contract and that the State's claim is barred by the statute of limitation applicable to contracts cases. This argument fails as well. The State correctly asserts that it was not a party to the Consent to Adoption, is not bound by any contract between Agen and Hanzuk, and therefore is not subject to the statute of limitation applicable to contract cases. The applicable statute of limitation is the six-year limit found in AS 09.10.120. [3] The date of the accrual of the cause of action is October 1987, the earliest period for which the State seeks reimbursement for public assistance paid for Andrea's support. The action was initiated by the State in 1992, when Agen received service of the NFFR pursuant to AS 25.27.160, and therefore falls within the six-year statute of limitation.