 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brummels v. Tomasek, No. S-05-1548,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, May 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Fraudulent misrepresentation claim was properly dismissed pursuant to Neb. Ct. R. Pleading Civ. Actions 12(b)(6) (Rev. 2003) because business owner, who alleged that false information was submitted to IRS, failed to allege that false representations were made to him with the intention that he would rely upon them--a necessary element of the claim.
|
|||||
| McNally v. City of Omaha, No. S-05-1022,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, May 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was insufficient evidence to support a finding that furnaces in rental property were in violation of Omaha, Neb., Municipal Code ch. 48, art. I, § 48-71(2). There was no showing that the furnaces were dangerous, and the application of municipal ordinance inspections and permit requirements was not authorized by statute.
|
|||||
| State v. Merrill, No. S-06-081,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, May 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The appellate court lacked jurisdiction over the State's appeal of an order directing the court clerk to return bond money to defendant's grandfather because Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-1301 (Cum. Supp. 2006) and 25-1911 (Reissue 1995) were not specific statutory authorization for the State's appeal in this criminal case.
|
|||||
| State v. Morrow, No. S-06-866,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, May 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred in refusing to permit defendant to introduce unavailable witness's inconsistent statements for the purpose of impeaching her credibility under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-806. Guilty verdict was attributable to exclusion of evidence with which defendant sought to impeach unavailable witness's credibility.
|
|||||
| State v. Sommer, No. S-06-832,
SUPREME COURT OF NEBRASKA, May 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court erred in denying a motion to discharge based upon the failure to provide defendant with a speedy trial under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 29-1207(4)(f) (Reissue 1995) where the only evidence, journal entries from another case, simply did not indicate that the instant case could not have been tried within the speedy trial period.
|
|||||
| Applied Underwriters, Inc. v. Emplr. Outsource Serv., No. A-05-898,
NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an employer executed a promissory note payable to an insurer for a workers' compensation insurance policy, personal jurisdiction did not exist over the employer under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-536, because it did not have sufficient minimum contacts with Nebraska and the promissory note contained an Illinois choice-of-law provision.
|
|||||
| State Law Enforcement Bargaining Council v. State, No. A-05-693,
NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Staff and conservation officer supervisors of games and park commission had supervisory responsibilities requiring independent judgment. Thus, they were supervisors as defined by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-801(9) and under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-816(3)(a), were excluded from law enforcement officials' bargaining unit under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 81-1373(1)(g).
|
|||||
| Trueblood v. Roberts, No. A-05-1084,
NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a decedent died and his ex-wife remained the named beneficiary of his life insurance policy, summary judgment against her was inappropriate because the settlement agreement and the decree in the divorce did not show an intention to effect a change in her status as beneficiary.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
