Charles A. Cacciola
Charles sat for the New York bar in July 2011 and then headed to Alaska awaiting exam results. He passed, but never returned to New York. He joined the firm in 2013.
Charles’ practice emphasizes municipal clients. As the needs of Alaska municipalities are wide-ranging, so too is Charles’ work. Alaska Statute Title 29, the Open Meetings Act, and the Public Record Act may be seen as the core of municipal law, but municipalities are, legally and practically, Alaska’s largest corporations. They own, lease, and regulate land, operate utilities, ports and medical facilities, have extensive construction projects, invest and (hopefully) have insurance coverage, and are among the state’s largest employers.
Charles also advises private entities in similar matters. Public or private, Charles works with clients to realize effective and efficient solutions. Whether a dog-bite citation appealed to the city manager, an admiralty case to the Ninth Circuit, or talking a client through a procedural quagmire, Charles’ focus is on achieving the client’s goals: The best path is not always the obvious one, as practicing law, and recreation, in Alaska have shown.
Before moving to Alaska, Charles attended the University of Michigan for law and graduate school, studying finance and legal development in the former Soviet states. Anchorage, it turns out, has better skiing, climbing, and fishing, and about ten million fewer people than Moscow. He detests writing website bios.
- Bingman v. City of Dillingham, 376 P. 3d 1245 (Alaska 2016). In trial court and appeal, prevailed in defending against taxpayer claim that tax debt had been satisfied; AK Supreme Court invited the city to request an award of its full reasonable attorneys fees incurred on appeal.
- Karevn Evich Inc. v. City of Adak, No 15-36002 (9th Cir.). Defended city in U.S. District Court and on appeal to Ninth Circuit against claim of maritime negligence; all claims dismissed on summary judgment and the city was awarded partial attorney fees.
- Kimberly Kopp v. City of Galena, Case No. 4GA-16-00026 CI. Defended on appeal to superior court city decision that recall petition was legally sufficient and should appear on ballot. Plaintiff stipulated to dismissal following service of 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.
J.D. University of Michigan Law School, 2011
B.A. Marlboro College (with honors), 2006
- Commercial Litigation
- Public and Private Commercial Transactions
- State of Alaska
- U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit