Note from the Edito

• Publication year: 2007

§ 24 Alaska L. Rev. 0. NOTE FROM THE EDITO

Alaska Law Review
Volume 24
Cited: 24 Alaska L. Rev. 0

NOTE FROM THE EDITOR

The staff of the Alaska Law Review is pleased to present our June 2007 issue. The Year-in-Review continues to be published online at http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/alr.

We hope that the five pieces in this issue appeal tot he varied sectors of the Alaska legal community. The Comment by Teresa Carns examines Alaska's responses to the landmark United States Supreme Court decision in Blakely v. Washington. Fred Triem's Comment describes how the Alaska Supreme Court and other courts nationwide have confused the Business Judgment Rule with corporate directors' duty of care, and concludes with some reasons why the Business Judgment Rule should not be codified. The COmment by Keith Rogers discusses Alaska law concerning close corporations, and proposes a new framework within which Alaska should consider minority-shareholder rights. Next, Chris Lott's Note examines the current educational-adequacy litigation in Moore v. State, and suggests there is support for finding an adequacy standard in the Education Clause of the Alaska Consitution. Finally, Erik Smith's Note discusses the legal and factual basis for the use of Dental Therapists to provide dental healthcare to Alaska...