refute the special need for the seizure and the validity of the
Civil Procedure
Rule: 89
Jurisdiction: AK
Bluebook Citation: Alaska R. Civ. P. 89
plaintiff’s claim for possession of the property. (l) Duration and Vacation of Prejudgment Seizure Orders Issued Pursuant to Hearing. A prejudgment seizure order issued pursuant to a hearing provided for in section (c) of this rule shall unless sooner released or discharged, cease to be of any force or effect and the property seized shall be released from the operation of the order at the expiration of six (6) months from the date of the issuance of the order, unless a notice of readiness for trial is filed or a judgment is entered against the defendant in the action in which the order was issued, in which case the order shall continue in effect until released or vacated after judgment as provided in these rules. However, upon motion of the plaintiff, made not less than ten (10) nor more than sixty (60) days before the expiration of such period of six (6) months, and upon notice of not less than five (5) days to the defendant, the court in which the action is pending may, by order filed prior to the expiration of the period, extend the duration of the order for an additional period or periods as the court may direct, if the court is satisfied that the failure to file the notice of readiness is due to the dilatoriness of the defendant and was not caused by any action of the plaintiff. The order may be extended from time to time in the manner herein prescribed. (Amended by SCO 49 effective January 1, 1963; by SCO 156 effective December 8, 1972; by SCO 416 effective August 1, 1980; by SCO 1153 effective July 15, 1994; and by SCO 1435 effective October 15, 2001) Cross References (b) CROSS REFERENCE: AS 09.40.260 (e) CROSS REFERENCE: AS 09.40.270 — AS 09.40.300
Chat with this court rule using AI
Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this court rule, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.