 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Carruth v. State, Nos. S-04-1305, S-04-1422.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, April 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because patient was under age of 21 years at time his malpractice claim accrued, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-213 tolled running of applicable two-year limitations period until date on which he turned 21. However, because he did not file any claim until more than two years after turning 21, his claims were barred by applicable statutes of limitation.
|
|||||
| Lambert v. Holmberg, No. S-04-1334.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, April 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not err in not granting private sewerline owners an injunction to prevent homeowners' sewage from entering the line; sewage entering private part of line was continuous and repeated trespass but was largely imperceptible and there was: (1) public interest in disposal of sewage; (2) no substantial damage, and (3) an adequate remedy at law.
|
|||||
| Metro. Utils. Dist. v. Aquila, Inc., No. S-05-127.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, April 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Metropolitan utility district (MUD) was properly ordered to cease construction of a gas main extension because extension was not in the public interest under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 57-1303, rather primary purpose was for MUD's growth in that no economic feasibility study was done, and MUD did not consider impact on its ratepayers.
|
|||||
| State ex rel. Counsel for Discipline v. Reilly, No. S-05-1035.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, April 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney who was disbarred in Iowa where, as result of an uncontrollable gambling habit that left him constantly in need of funds, attorney misappropriated from his law firm's trust account over $ 96,000 belonging to client and created check-kiting scheme to replace misappropriated funds, was reciprocally disbarred pursuant to Neb. Ct. R. Disc. 21.
|
|||||
| State v. Liston, No. S-05-1046.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, April 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant argued that the statute he was charged with violating was unconstitutional, his waiver of defects under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1812 did not permit the district court to entertain a facial challenge to the challenged statute raised in a motion to quash so long as defendant's plea to the general issue still stood.
|
|||||
| Kramer v. Eagle Eye Home Inspections, Inc., No. A-04-1253.,
NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS, April 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an action in which a home purchaser sued a home inspection company because the purchaser's home was found to have termite damage, an inspection agreement's arbitration clause was void and unenforceable due to the absence of notice language required by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2602.02.
|
|||||
| Lamar Co. of Neb., L.L.C. v. Omaha Zoning Bd. of Appeals, No. S-04-1300.,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, April 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 14-410, companies' application for sign permit and request for variance was denied due to landowner's pending application and request for variances, and that application and request had to be resolved before companies' application could be acted upon. District court did not err in denying companies' requested variance.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
