James Henry Bingman, Sr., Appellant v. City of Dillingham, Appellee

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed the superior court’s judgment that no contract existed between James Henry Bingman and the City of Dillingham because the City expressly rejected Bingman’s offer and silence does not constitute acceptance; consequently the taxpayer did not redeem the foreclosed property. The court also declined to reach the statute‑of‑frauds issue and upheld the denial of Bingman’s motion as a proper exercise of discretion.