Skip to main content

In Re 2001 Redistricting Cases

Citations

  • 44 P.3d 141
  • 2002 Alas. LEXIS 41
  • 2002 WL 437164

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that “a bizarrely-shaped appendage” violated the compactness requirement for redistricting
  • holding only that challengers’ due process claims “ha[d] no merit”
  • instructing that Board may combine excess populations from adjoining boroughs

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fabe, Matthews, Eastaugh, Bryner, Carpeneti

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named In Re 2001 Redistricting Cases

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.