 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Douglas County v. Kowal, No. S-04-1306.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of the contempt proceeding was affirmed because the employee had been reinstated to her title of office manager/information coordinator, had received all required backpay, and was performing duties which were included in the job description for that position.
|
|||||
| Johnston v. Neb. Dep't of Corr. Servs., No. S-04-1404.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate's appeal was dismissed as moot because the inmate was no longer in administrative confinement and had been returned to the general prison population of another institution, and the appellate court declined to hear the appeal under the public interest exception to the mootness doctrine.
|
|||||
| Pinnacle Bank v. Darland Constr. Co., No. S-04-1062.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment in favor of the bank in its replevin action was reversed and remanded because the funds were not subject to an action for replevin, when the specific funds were not marked or set aside in a manner that would allow them to be specifically identified.
|
|||||
| State ex rel. Counsel for Discipline v. Paragas, No. S-05-772.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to Neb. Ct. R. Disc. 13 and an attorney's conditional admission, Nebraska Supreme Court found that the attorney violated Neb. Code Prof. Resp. DR 1-102(A)(1) and (5) and Neb. Code Prof. Resp. DR 7-102(A)(3), as well as his oath of office as an attorney under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 7-104. It suspended him from the practice of law for 60 days.
|
|||||
| State v. Kawa, Nos. S-05-768, S-05-769.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, January 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Disqualification of defense counsel was affirmed because disqualification was necessary to protect both defendants' constitutional rights and the court's independent interest in the fairness of the proceedings and ethical standards of the profession.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
