12 Nebraska opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Nebraska courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Turner v. Turnergreen2 sentences1999We distinguish the situation where mere attempts to settle are made. "[T]he mere pendency of negotiations during the period of a statute of limitations, which are conducted in good faith with a view to ultimate compromise, is not of itself sufficient to establish an estoppel." Turner v. Turner, 582 P.2d 600, 603 (Wyo.1978). 1999We distinguish the situation where mere attempts to settle are made. “[T]he mere pendency of negotiations during the period of a statute of limitations, which are conducted in good faith with a view to ultimate compromise, is not of itself sufficient to establish an estoppel.” Turner v. Turner, 582 P.2d 600, 603 (Wyo. 1978). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nebraska. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Woodard v. City of Lincoln
green
2 sentences2002Woodard v. City of Lincoln, 256 Neb. 61 , 588 N.W.2d 831 (1999). 2002Woodard v. City of Lincoln, 256 Neb. 61 , 588 N.W.2d 831 (1999). | 2 | 1999–2002 |
State v. Savage
green
1 sentence2018Stat. § 27-901 (1) (Reissue 2016). 10 State v. Elseman, 287 Neb. 134 , 841 N.W.2d 225 (2014). 11 Id. - 885 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 301 Nebraska R eports STATE v. SAVAGE Cite as 301 Neb. 873 were accurately transcribed and (2) who actually sent the text messages.12 Savage does not challenge the first prong of this test, but, rather, argues that the State failed to prove that Savage was the author of the text messages. [9] The State met its burden for authentication regarding the text messages in exhibits 6, 8, and 23. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Northeast Neb. Pub. Power Dist. v. Nebraska Pub. Power Dist.
green
1 sentence2017Id. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Vela
green
1 sentence2017Vela alleged that if his counsel had allowed Zlomke to admin- ister adaptive behavior testing, the results would have shown - 242 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 297 Nebraska R eports STATE v. VELA Cite as 297 Neb. 227 that he had significant limitations in adaptive functioning in at least two of the relevant skill areas and that the court would have found that the second prong of the test for “mental retar- dation” had been established. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Manker v. Manker
green
1 sentence2003Id. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. NEB. ASS'N OF PUBLIC EMP.
green
2 sentences2002Employees, 239 Neb. 653 , 477 N.W.2d 577 (1991); Reifschneider v. Nebraska Methodist Hosp., supra. The first prong of this test is met when one lulls his or her adversary into a false sense of security, thereby causing that person to subject his or her claim to the bar of the statute of limitations, and then pleads the very delay caused by his or her conduct as a defense to the action when it is filed. 2002Employees, 239 Neb. 653 , 477 N.W.2d 577 (1991); Reifschneider v. Nebraska Methodist Hosp., supra. The first prong of this test is met when one lulls his or her adversary into a false sense of security, thereby causing that person to subject his or her claim to the bar of the statute of limitations, and then pleads the very delay caused by his or her conduct as a defense to the action when it is filed. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Elsa W. De Wagenknecht v. Mrs. Hugo Stinnes
green
1 sentence2000De Wagenknecht v. Stinnes, 250 F.2d 414 (D.C. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
State v. Parks
green
2 sentences2000State v. Parks, 253 Neb. 939 , 573 N.W.2d 453 (1998); State v. Becerra, supra. Even assuming that the first prong of this test has been satisfied, it is evident that the second prong has not. 2000State v. Parks, 253 Neb. 939 , 573 N.W.2d 453 (1998); State v. Becerra, supra. Even assuming that the first prong of this test has been satisfied, it is evident that the second prong has not. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Strickland v. Washington
green
2 sentences1994The first prong of this test requires that defendant show that counsel’s performance “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” Id. at 688 , 104 S.Ct. at 2065 . 1994The first prong of this test requires that defendant show that counsel’s performance “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” Id. at 688 , 104 S.Ct. at 2065 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Coker v. Georgia
green
2 sentences1985Although holding that a sentence of death for the rape of an adult female was grossly disproportionate and excessive punishment forbidden by the eighth amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584, 597 , 97 S. Ct. 2861 , 53 L. 1985Although holding that a sentence of death for the rape of an adult female was grossly disproportionate and excessive punishment forbidden by the eighth amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584, 597 , 97 S. Ct. 2861 , 53 L. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Solem v. Helm
red
1 sentence1985Regarding the first prong of the analysis, the Solem court stated that the gravity of an offense can be determined in part by comparing with other offenses the “harm caused or threatened to the victim or society.” 463 U.S. at 292 . | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.