Robert G. Simmons

This case involved a dispute over a conditional sales contract for a house trailer originally purchased by the Hobbs from Burnett’s Home Trailer Sales under what was alleged to be a usurious arrangement violating Nebraska’s Installment Loan Act. After the contract was assigned to the bank, plaintiff Rader assumed the payments via an agreement that released the original buyers, made several payments, and then sued to declare the contract void and recover amounts paid. The trial court ruled for the plaintiff, awarding damages and finding conversion, but the Nebraska Supreme Court reversed and dismissed the action. The court held that a cause of action or defense based on usury is personal to the borrower and those in legal privity and is not assignable to a stranger to the original transaction, as the statutes aim to protect necessitous borrowers rather than permit windfalls.

business & regulatory

This case involved a personal injury lawsuit brought by Thomas W. Singles against Union Pacific Railroad Company for negligence in its switchyard operations that caused severe injuries to Singles while he worked for the Railway Express Agency, including the loss of his foot and part of his leg; the Railway Express Agency was also named due to subrogation rights under workers' compensation. A jury awarded Singles $124,765, but the Nebraska Supreme Court reversed the judgment and remanded for a new trial. The core reasoning was that the trial court committed prejudicial error by allowing testimony about pension benefits Singles received, which was immaterial and incompetent, and the court held that such evidence must be excluded in any retrial while declining to resolve other claimed errors regarding jury instructions on future damages and exhibits.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved a dispute over title to an 81.58-acre tract of land, including an island and related accretion and reliction in the Missouri River east of Washington County, Nebraska. Plaintiff Krimlofski sought to quiet title based on his adverse possession since the 1920s through hunting, fishing, and related activities, while defendant Uerling claimed ownership via a chain of title from a government lot on the west bank plus her own adverse possession. The district court ruled for the plaintiff, and the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the evidence established the plaintiff's actual, open, exclusive, and continuous possession under a claim of ownership for more than the required 10-year statutory period. The court further reasoned that the disputed land was accretion attached to the island rather than the mainland and that the defendant had not proven her own adverse possession claim, applying precedents on riparian rights and island accretion.

property

This case involved a conversion action by Alf Elander against Kellogg Grain Company and Theodore Apolius to recover the unpaid balance on a note secured by a chattel mortgage on 6,000 bushels of wheat stored in granaries in Keith County, Nebraska. Apolius sold approximately 3,500 bushels of wheat to Kellogg without the plaintiff's consent or knowledge, and the plaintiff alleged that Kellogg converted the mortgaged property by failing to pay him. The trial court sustained a motion for directed verdict and dismissed the case at the close of the plaintiff's evidence, and the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed that ruling. The court held that the mortgage description was too indefinite to identify the specific wheat covered against third parties because the granaries held far more than 6,000 bushels with no clear means of separation, and that the plaintiff failed to prove the sold wheat came from his security since more than 6,000 bushels remained afterward.

propertyproceduretorts & liability

This case was a civil contempt proceeding brought by the Kaspareks against the Mays for alleged violations of a 1956 district court decree that required removal of a dike obstructing the natural flood channel of the Little Blue River on the Mays' Jefferson County, Nebraska property or, alternatively, partial removal plus construction of a sufficient drainage ditch. The trial court found the Mays in contempt but not willful or contumacious, interpreted the decree to require lowering the dike only to an 82-foot ground level, upheld the existing ditch as sufficient, and struck damage claims from the proceeding. On appeal, the Nebraska Supreme Court reversed in part, holding that the Mays bore the burden to fully comply with the decree and had failed to do so by not lowering the dike to natural ground level or properly extending the ditch, that willful contempt was shown despite mitigating factors, that costs and expenses could be recovered in contempt actions, and that damages could not; it remanded with directions for specific compliance measures within 90 days, including lowering the dike to 80.5 feet and restoring/extending the ditch.

propertyprocedure

The case involved a pedestrian, Esther Hiner, suing driver Jerry Nelson for damages after being struck by his car in Omaha, Nebraska. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed, claiming errors in the jury instructions regarding contributory negligence, the definition of preponderance of the evidence, and the overall clarity of the instructions on negligence and comparative fault. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, holding that the instructions, when considered as a whole, correctly stated the law, were not confusing, and adequately explained the burden of proof and the process for comparing negligence under the state's comparative negligence rules.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case involved a criminal prosecution for motor vehicle homicide under Nebraska law, where defendant Garry C. May was charged with causing the death of Marvin Williams by operating a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol and colliding with Williams' car. A jury convicted May, leading to a sentence of one to three years in the state reformatory. On appeal, the Nebraska Supreme Court reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial. The court held that jury instruction No. 17 improperly directed jurors to reconcile conflicts in evidence and accept testimony unless it was irreconcilable with other credible evidence, thereby infringing on the jury's exclusive role in assessing witness credibility and the weight of testimony.

criminal lawprocedure

This case was a quo warranto action in which relator John R. Brogan challenged respondent Harold F. Boehner's election as district director of Consumers Public Power District No. 5 after the 1960 general election, seeking to oust him and claim the office based on disputed absentee and disabled voter ballots. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment for the respondent, finding that 11 absentee ballots were properly counted despite missing execution locations because the military officers administering them had statewide authority with no territorial limits, while 8 disabled voter ballots were correctly rejected due to improper venue or undated certificates. On the remaining issue of untraceable illegal votes, the court held that without evidence showing for whom they were cast, it would not apply arbitrary deduction or apportionment rules and instead upheld the canvassing board's declared result since the record did not clearly establish a contrary outcome.

electionsprocedure

This case concerned a priority dispute over funds held by the Lincoln Telephone and Telegraph Company that were owed to the defendant contractor for work on a telephone exchange. The plaintiff subcontractor had obtained a default judgment against the defendant and garnished the funds, while the intervener surety company claimed superior rights based on a performance bond it had issued and a subsequent assignment of the contract proceeds from the defendant. The district court ruled for the plaintiff on the priority issue, and the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed. The court reasoned that the assignment was a new agreement supported by consideration that replaced any implied reimbursement obligation arising from the surety bond and directed the funds first toward obligations such as the plaintiff's judgment.

business & regulatoryprocedure

The case concerned the competency of certain witnesses to testify regarding an alleged oral contract in a dispute over the distribution of a deceased person's estate in Nebraska. The Supreme Court of Nebraska held that the spouses of the decedent's nonresident children were incompetent to testify under the dead man's statute (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1202) because they possessed a direct legal interest in the outcome through their marital rights in the estate. The court reasoned that nonresident spouses have the same marital interest in Nebraska real property as resident spouses, overruling prior precedent that had exempted them from the statute's bar based on their ability to be divested without joining in a conveyance. As a result, the appellants lacked sufficient competent evidence to support their claims, and the motion for rehearing was denied.

propertyprocedurefamily law

This case involves a condemnation action in which the City of Lincoln sought a permanent and temporary easement across the Rellers' 135-acre property, including a trailer park, to construct and maintain the Havelock Interceptor Sewer. After the county court awarded $1,000 in damages, the property owners appealed to the district court, where a jury returned a verdict of $6,500; the city then appealed that judgment. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the district court's decision, holding that the trial court did not err in refusing the city's proposed jury instructions on zoning regulations because the instructions actually given adequately addressed the property's market value for uses permitted under applicable zoning ordinances. The court reasoned that evidence of the easements' impact on the trailer park's operations, drainage, utilities, and potential for subdivision was properly considered, and that zoning matters were sufficiently covered without needing the additional instructions.

property

This case involved a highway construction contractor's claim against the Nebraska Department of Roads for amounts allegedly owed on a paving and grading project, including a withheld contract balance, a delay penalty assessed by the state, and extra costs from increased common carrier rates. The trial court awarded the contractor the balance and rate-increase amounts but denied the delay-penalty claim; both parties appealed. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the denial of the delay penalty, holding that the contract gave the state discretionary authority to refuse time extensions and assess liquidated damages, but reversed the award for increased hauling costs and remanded for recalculation of the precise amount due the certified truckers plus the admitted balance, with interest.

business & regulatoryprocedure

This case involved a workers' compensation claim by Vencl Skalak against Seward County, Nebraska, and its insurer, alleging that exposure to extreme cold while operating road maintenance equipment on November 13, 1959, caused or aggravated osteomyelitis in his left foot, requiring surgery. After a single-judge denial of benefits, the plaintiff attempted to waive rehearing and appeal directly to district court, but the full compensation court proceeded with rehearing over his objection, again denying relief; the district court affirmed on the record. The Nebraska Supreme Court first held, based on precedent, that either party has a paramount right to rehearing before the full court, making the direct appeal attempt invalid. On the merits, the court found that the plaintiff failed to meet his burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a work-related accident caused objective symptoms of injury, given his long-standing pre-existing osteomyelitis and lack of supporting medical causation testimony. The judgment denying compensation was affirmed.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case involves an appeal by several common carriers from an order of the Nebraska State Railway Commission granting Hagen Truck Lines, Inc., authority to operate as a contract carrier transporting meat, meat products, and related commodities in refrigerated equipment from packing plants in Omaha, Fremont, and Scottsbluff to points throughout Nebraska. The applicant, a new corporation with experienced management and financial resources, was supported by major meat packers who sought to outsource their specialized delivery operations rather than maintain their own fleets. The court affirmed the commission's decision, finding that the applicant was fit, willing, and able to provide the service; that the specialized refrigerated peddle service was not available from existing common carriers; and that granting the permit would be consistent with the public interest under the state's Motor Carrier Act because it would not substantially harm competing carriers or conflict with legislative policy.

business & regulatory

The case involved a complaint in Douglas County juvenile court alleging that minor Fred M. Hans Jr. was a neglected and delinquent child due to his participation in the unauthorized taking of an automobile and lack of proper parental care. The juvenile court adjudged him delinquent and committed him to the Boys' Training School at Kearney. On appeal, the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the constitutionality of the Separate Juvenile Court Act could not be challenged collaterally in this proceeding under the de facto court doctrine, that no jury trial was required because the complaint did not charge a crime, and that the evidence of the minor's involvement in pushing the stolen vehicle was sufficient to support the delinquency finding. The court also declined to disturb the disposition to training school given the record presented.

criminal lawfamily lawprocedure

The case concerned the interpretation of a codicil to Daisy Coryell's will, which divided her estate into halves, with one half going to a foundation and the other shared equally among her two sisters and her husband's niece; after one sister predeceased Daisy without surviving issue, the dispute was whether that share lapsed. The court held that the gift lapsed, that Daisy died intestate as to that portion of her estate, and that her sole heir, granddaughter Lorraine, was entitled to inherit it. The core reasoning was that the beneficiaries were individually named rather than described as a class, the anti-lapse statute did not apply, the will's explanation for omitting Lorraine was not an express disinheritance, and the general presumption against partial intestacy could not supply an intent not expressed in the instrument's language.

propertyfamily law

In this case, plaintiff Frances J. Herndon sued defendants Bryce Crawford and Mary B. Crawford for personal injury damages after Mary Crawford's car backed into the parked vehicle where Herndon was sitting at a shopping center, alleging negligence in failing to keep a proper lookout and give warning. A jury awarded Herndon $1,500, but the defendants appealed the trial court's denial of their post-verdict motions. The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed the judgment and remanded for a new trial, holding that jury instruction No. 13 was prejudicially erroneous because it permitted recovery for future pain and suffering without evidence showing with reasonable certainty that such harm would occur. The court noted the evidence addressed only past injuries, medical costs, and lost wages, and found no support for the future damages portion of the instruction under applicable precedent.

torts & liability

This case involved a challenge by the widow of Martin F. Lewin to the probate of his will in Valley County court, on the grounds that the deceased was actually a resident of Lancaster County at the time of his death, depriving the Valley County court of jurisdiction under state statute. The county court had admitted the will to probate after a hearing where the widow was present but raised no objections, and no timely appeal was taken from that order. The widow later filed a petition in district court attacking the probate as void for lack of jurisdiction, but the district court struck the petition and dismissed the action. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, holding that county courts have exclusive original jurisdiction over probate matters as a class, that the residency finding was a matter of venue finally adjudicated and thus res judicata, and that the judgment could not be collaterally attacked absent fraud. The court further noted that the petition showed no cause of action could be stated on the issues raised.

family lawpropertyprocedure

In this replevin action, plaintiff Sheridan sought possession of a grain combine from defendant Dudden Implement, Inc., which had acquired the machine through a trade with Levander. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the jury verdict for Sheridan, holding that his interest was superior. Sheridan had sold the combine to Levander under a conditional sale contract assigned to GMAC, later paid off the balance and became subrogated to GMAC's rights, and filed the contract in the Nebraska county where the combine was located while Levander was a nonresident. This filing complied with the applicable recording statute and provided constructive notice to later purchasers without actual knowledge, and the subsequent chattel mortgage did not constitute a novation or release of the conditional sale contract.

propertybusiness & regulatory

This case involved a minor plaintiff suing Nemaha County, Nebraska, for injuries sustained in a 1960 automobile accident allegedly caused by a defective bridge and the county's negligence in its construction and maintenance. The plaintiff filed a petition within the 30-day statutory period under section 39-834 but the summons was not properly directed to or served on the county defendant due to a defective praecipe requesting service on individuals instead. The trial court sustained a demurrer and dismissed the action for failure to commence it timely. The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, reasoning that under state law an action commences only upon service of summons on the defendant, the limitation applies to all persons without regard to disability, and the plaintiff bore responsibility for ensuring the praecipe correctly identified the defendant.

proceduretorts & liability