Pedersen v. Blythe, 292 P.3d 182

Pedersen was convicted of criminal weapons misconduct and assault stemming from an incident where he allegedly fired at a dwelling.
Pedersen filed a pro se civil complaint against Blythe and Luxford alleging defamation and trespass.
Blythe and Luxford moved to dismiss based on collateral estoppel from Pedersen’s conviction.
Superior court granted the motion to dismiss on the basis of collateral estoppel without giving Pedersen notice of reliance on outside materials.
Pedersen appeals, challenging the use of collateral estoppel and the dismissal of trespass claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court gave proper notice when relying on outside materials	Pedersen argues the court failed to notify him of its intent to rely on outside materials	Blythe and Luxford contend the court properly relied on the conviction	Error to rely without notice; harmless for defamation, plain error for trespass.
Whether collateral estoppel barred Pedersen's defamation claim	Pedersen contends defamation claim should not be precluded	Defendants rely on collateral estoppel from the criminal conviction	Collateral estoppel applied to the defamation element; defamation claims impaired accordingly.
Whether the trespass claims were properly dismissed or should be remanded	Trespass claims sufficiently stated and not subject to collateral estoppel	Dismissal was appropriate based on collateral estoppel	Dismissal of trespass claims was plain error; remand for consideration of trespass claims.

Wyatt v. Wyatt, 65 P.3d 825 (Alaska 2003) (discusses collateral estoppel and related relief)
Marcia V. v. State, 201 P.3d 496 (Alaska 2009) (cited for plain error considerations and standard of review)
Belluomini v. Fred Meyer of Alaska, Inc., 993 P.2d 1009 (Alaska 1999) (concerning state action and constitutional claims in private actions)