Chignik Lagoon Lawyer, Alaska

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-814-6700

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-814-6700

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-814-6700

By submitting this request, I authorize you to forward my information to multiple potential lawyers and I agree to your Terms of Use and Privacy Policy including the Consent to Receive Automated Phone Calls, Emails and Texts. Information you provide is not privileged or confidential.



Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-814-6700

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-814-6700

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-814-6700

By submitting this request, I authorize you to forward my information to multiple potential lawyers and I agree to your Terms of Use and Privacy Policy including the Consent to Receive Automated Phone Calls, Emails and Texts. Information you provide is not privileged or confidential.

Lawyer.com

TIPS

Lawyer.com makes finding Chignik Lagoon Lawyers fast and easy. Refine your search for Chignik Lagoon lawyers by legal practice area. Find a quality and affordable lawyer by reviewing detail profiles for Chignik Lagoon attorneys. Many Lawyer.com featured Lawyers in Alaska will offer free legal consultations and all have Alaska law expertise.

SAMPLE LEGAL CASES

Gottstein v. Kraft

... Jim and Terrie set up reciprocal revocable trusts in 1995 as part of their estate planning process. The couple decided that in order for both trusts to contain a substantial amount of assets, the Alpine Woods property would be placed in Terrie's trust. ...

STATE, DEPT. OF CORR. v. Hendricks-Pearce

... The State of Alaska provided a prisoner extensive medical care during his incarceration. Around the time of his release from custody, the prisoner won a medical malpractice judgment against the State. ... [4]. While in custody Pearce sued the State for medical malpractice. ...

Anderson v. Alyeska Pipeline Service Co.

... In response, Alyeska disagreed with Anderson's proposed method of statutory construction and maintained that it fell within the statutory definition of "project owner." It argued in the alternative that maintenance of the pipeline was a project and that it was a "project owner" even ...

© 2024 LAWYER.COM INC.

Use of this website constitutes acceptance of Lawyer.com’s Terms of Use, Email, Phone, & Text Message and Privacy Policies.