Court Opinion

ID: 9558935
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 17:19:15.582342+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:09:39.999223
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing
In Hendrickson v. Freericks, 620 P.2d 205 (Alaska 1980), we concluded partly:
Because the trial judge ruled that Hen-drickson did not have standing to terminate the lease, it was never decided whether the lessees’ breach was so severe as to warrant forfeiture.
At 212. Accordingly, the case was remanded to the superior court “for a determination on the forfeiture issue.” Id. at 212.
Phylene Jeffcoat, appellee and cross-appellant, has petitioned for rehearing, calling to our attention the trial court’s findings that, facially at least, appear to resolve this issue in lessees’ favor. Jeffcoat urges us to reconsider our decision, in light of these findings, and to hold, at the appellate level, that forfeiture of lessees’ interest is not warranted.
Despite Jeffcoat’s argument, we continue to believe that this issue should be left for initial determination by the trial court, in accordance with our prior mandate.