556 P.3d 1188
Alaska2024Background
- Randall Bishop and his mother Teresa Bishop co-owned a lot in Kodiak, Alaska, and contracted with Red Hook Construction, LLC to build a retaining wall.
- The Bishops paid Red Hook $15,000 by credit card during construction; the relationship broke down, and both parties sued for breach of contract.
- The superior court found Red Hook breached a fixed-price contract and awarded the Bishops damages, assuming the $15,000 credit card payment would be reversed by their credit card company.
- The Bishops later moved for relief from judgment under Alaska Civil Rule 60(b), arguing the credit card company did not reverse the payment and they remained liable for the charge.
- Over a year after the judgment, the superior court granted relief, adjusting damages in favor of the Bishops.
- Red Hook appealed, asserting the motion was untimely under Rule 60(b)(1)'s one-year limitation period.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Can relief from judgment be granted for a court's mistaken assumption under Rule 60(b)(1)? | The court's mistaken assumption warrants relief. | A mistaken assumption isn't grounds under Rule 60(b)(1). | Yes, such mistakes or inadvertence can support relief. |
| Was the Bishops' Rule 60(b)(1) motion timely given the one-year limitation? | Motion was timely because they learned of mistake later. | Motion was untimely, filed over one year after judgment. | The motion was untimely; the one-year limit can't be tolled. |
| Did the court err in relying on when the Bishops discovered the charge was not reversed? | Bishops couldn't have known outcome until after appeal. | Trial record showed Bishops knew charge wasn't reversed. | Court's reliance on discovery timing was clearly erroneous. |
| Was the adjustment of the damages award proper under Rule 60(b)(1)? | Damages should reflect their actual overpayment. | No basis to adjust damages; timing bars relief. | Relief barred by untimeliness; adjustment improper. |
Key Cases Cited
- Alaska Truck Transp. Inc. v. Berman Packing Co., 469 P.2d 697 (Alaska 1970) (Rule 60(b)(1) relief may be based on broad grounds including court mistakes)
- Johnson v. Johnson, 394 P.3d 598 (Alaska 2017) (court cannot enlarge Rule 60(b)(1)'s one-year time limit)
- Vezey v. Green, 171 P.3d 1125 (Alaska 2007) (pendency of appeal does not toll the Rule 60(b)(1) limitation period)
- Farrell v. Dome Lab’ys, 650 P.2d 380 (Alaska 1982) (appeal does not extend Rule 60(b)’s one-year limit)