Allstate Insurance Company and Wayne Watson, Petitioners v. Ron D — Winfree, J., Concurring in Part and Dissenting…

Summary

The opinion reluctantly agrees that Alaska should recognize a fraudulent-concealment-of-evidence tort because denying it while retaining the existing spoliation tort would be inconsistent. It disagrees, however, with limiting the new tort's remedy, reasoning that proof of the tort's elements establishes litigation-cost harm and supports the same remedies available for spoliation, including punitive damages where otherwise authorized. The opinion would therefore adopt a remedial framework matching the existing spoliation tort.