 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Pohlmann v. Neb. HHS, No. S-04-1327.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order of Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services denying patient's Medicaid benefits was error as it was based upon "any circumstances" test of 42 U.S.C.S. § 1396p(d)(3)(B)(i) and 469 Neb. Admin. Code § 2-009.07A5b(2), which were inapplicable to testamentary trust, and patient could not compel distribution from trust.
|
|||||
| Shipler v. GMC, No. S-03-1472.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Verdict of $ 19,562,000 was not excessive, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142, where plaintiff was rendered quadriplegic with no possibility of employment for her projected life expectancy of 45 years, and the jury was properly instructed regarding medical care and supplies, lost wages, and physical and mental pain and suffering.
|
|||||
| State ex rel. Counsel for Discipline of the Neb. Supreme Court v. Petersen, No. S-04-1173.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Previously disciplined attorney was suspended indefinitely for violating former Neb. Code Prof. Resp. DR 1-102(A)(1), (5), 6-101(A)(3), 6-102(A), and 7-101(A)(2) for serial neglect of client matters for a period of years, and supreme court was not persuaded his recent revelation of a substance abuse problem was a sufficient mitigating circumstance.
|
|||||
| State v. Lykens, No. S-04-844.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court analyzed defendant's supplemental motion for new trial under the wrong principles because it was not necessary for the court to consider whether the witness interview was "newly discovered evidence" and instead, it was only necessary to consider whether the evidence was "wrongfully" withheld by the State.
|
|||||
| State v. Schinzel, No. S-05-679.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred in placing patient in joint legal custody with Lincoln Regional Center and Lancaster County Community Mental Health Center as Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-3703(2) and (3) did not mention concept of legal custody with respect to commitments and did not authorize joint legal custody as set forth in district court's order.
|
|||||
| State v. Wagner, No. S-04-1104.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, March 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant did not demonstrate that he was denied his right to appeal due to the negligence or incompetence of counsel and was not entitled to postconviction relief; the evidence did not suggest that defendant gave express instructions to counsel regarding an appeal and did not show he was prejudiced by the fact that no appeal was filed.
|
|||||
| Hendrix v. Sivick, No. A-05-300.,
NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS, March 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court incorrectly set forth measures which might aid husband in obtaining modification of divorce decree; husband's acceptance of vehicle meant he waived right to appeal judgment concerning property division. Expert's opinion was credible, and district court did not err in relying on portions of wife's testimony and finding her credible.
|
|||||
| Hibbs v. Neb. State Patrol, No. A-04-1213.,
NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS, March 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Classification of a sex offender as a Level 3 by the Nebraska State Patrol was upheld on review because certain mitigating factors were properly rejected; he did not receive counseling for sex offenders under 272 Neb. Admin. Code § 19-015.02C (2003), and a debilitating illness departure under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-4013(2)(b)(ii) was not warranted.
|
|||||
| State v. Christine T. (In re Dakota L.), No. A-05-385.,
NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS, March 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Juvenile court did not err by assuming concurrent jurisdiction, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-1504, with a tribal court over neglected children because the record did not conclusively establish that the children were wards of a tribal court and because the children were not residing within the reservation of the tribe.
|
|||||
| Zach v. Neb. State Patrol, No. A-05-449.,
NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS, March 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a workers' compensation case, claimants' third amended petition alleging that a decedent suffered an injury from an accident and/or an occupational disease stated a claim upon which relief could be granted such that it should not have been dismissed pursuant to Neb. Ct. R. Pleading Civ. Actions 12(b)(6).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
