Opinion ID: 2588052
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Two of Richard's Points Are Barred.

Text: We decline to resolve two of Richard's issues because they challenge the 2005 judgment, from which Richard already appealed. We dismissed that appeal because Richard failed to prosecute it. [6] Alaska Statute 22.05.010 establishes that a party has only one appeal as of right. Richard used that appeal from the 2005 orders in 2006. His points on appeal in 2006, listed above, appear to cover his current arguments that the trial court deviated from the jury award by calculating specific performance based on too many of Richard's leases and that the trial court erred by awarding specific performance. [7] Even if Richard's previous appeal did not cover these arguments, any challenges to the 2005 judgment are also time-barred. Alaska Appellate Rule 204 requires a party to appeal within thirty days of entry of a final order or judgment. Appellate Rule 202 provides that a party may appeal a final judgment entered by the superior court. [8] We have defined final judgment as one that ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment. [9] In this case, litigation on the merits ended with the November and December 2005 orders. As our definition of final judgment indicates, execution comes after final judgment. Execution does not give a party a second chance to appeal the merits more than thirty days after the entry of final judgment. Thus, we will reach only the merits of Richard's claim that the trial court incorrectly calculated the amount awarded in the writ of execution.