William C. Hastings

Michael W. Ryan, convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the torture killing of James Thimm, appealed the district court's denial of his motion for postconviction relief under Nebraska law. Ryan raised multiple claims, primarily alleging ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel, along with issues such as judicial misconduct and cumulative error at trial and sentencing. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the denial, applying the standard that a defendant must show both deficient performance by counsel and resulting prejudice, and finding that many claims had already been resolved on direct appeal or lacked factual support. The court held that the district court's findings were not clearly erroneous and that Ryan failed to demonstrate a reasonable probability that the outcome would have differed but for any alleged deficiencies.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a medical malpractice claim by Betty Wagner against Dr. Douglas Pope, alleging that the doctor negligently failed to diagnose her appendicitis, leading to complications like a ruptured appendix and bowel obstruction. The trial court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, and the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed that decision. The court reasoned that the defendant's own affidavit as an expert, stating he had not breached the standard of care, established a prima facie case for summary judgment. The plaintiff failed to counter this with expert testimony showing a breach, as required in medical malpractice cases, and the deposition from the consulting surgeon actually confirmed that the standard of care was met; a layperson's affidavit was insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact.

healthcaretorts & liabilityprocedure

In this case, Ronald Williams filed a second motion for postconviction relief from his 1986 second-degree murder conviction, claiming the trial court omitted malice as a required element from the jury instructions in violation of due process and that his counsel was ineffective for failing to object. The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed the district court's denial of relief, holding that malice is and has been a material element of second-degree murder, so the defective instructions entitled Williams to relief even on a successive motion. The majority reasoned that the constitutional error was not procedurally defaulted in a way that barred review and that prior counsel's failures did not prevent consideration of the claim. A dissent maintained that the issue could and should have been raised in the first postconviction proceeding, making further relief unavailable.

criminal lawprocedurecivil rights

The case concerned the constitutionality of 1991 Neb. Laws, L.B. 795, § 6, which required that two percent of gross proceeds from lotteries conducted in counties with licensed racetracks be deposited into a Thoroughbred Racing Assistance Fund to supplement racing purses. Municipal corporations and individual taxpayers challenged the provision as an unconstitutional additional tax and on equal protection grounds, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against the state tax commissioner. The district court ruled the statute violated the Nebraska Constitution's special legislation prohibition and equal protection clauses, and enjoined its enforcement. On appeal, the Nebraska Supreme Court held that the municipal corporations lacked standing but the taxpayers had standing to challenge the law as an illegal expenditure of public funds; the court affirmed that the statute was unconstitutional under Neb. Const. art. III, § 24 and permanently enjoined its enforcement, without reaching the equal protection claims.

taxesbusiness & regulatory

Ruth Eggers sued the personal representative of Isabelle Barkdoll's estate and residuary charitable beneficiaries, seeking an injunction and specific performance of an alleged 1952 oral contract in which the Barkdolls promised to convey 160 acres of land to Eggers upon their deaths in exchange for personal services and maintenance of the property. After a bench trial, the district court denied relief, and the Court of Appeals affirmed on the ground that the action constituted a time-barred "claim" under the probate code, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2485. The Nebraska Supreme Court held that the action was not a probate claim because it disputed title to the land and thus was not subject to the nonclaim statute, but it affirmed the denial of relief because Eggers failed to prove the contract by clear and convincing evidence. The court reasoned that while testimony supported the existence of an oral agreement, Eggers' maintenance activities, payments, and use of the land were also consistent with a rental arrangement rather than referable solely to the alleged contract.

propertyprocedure

Pamela Cloonan sued the Food-4-Less grocery store for injuries from slipping and falling on its sidewalk after shopping, claiming ice created a dangerous condition the store failed to remedy despite actual or constructive notice. At trial, Cloonan's evidence showed the sidewalk was wet but not icy or slippery where she fell, with no direct testimony identifying ice at the fall site and testimony from others confirming salted or cleared areas nearby. The district court directed a verdict for the store at the close of her case, and the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, ruling that without evidence the store knew or should have known of a hazardous condition, Cloonan failed to meet her burden of proof on notice. The court applied the standard that a directed verdict is proper when an issue must be decided as a matter of law based on the plaintiff's evidence taken as true.

torts & liabilityprocedure