Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
85 Nebraska opinions name it 3 courts 1936–2022 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Atkinsgreen2 sentences2019Ed. 2d 313 (1985). 7 Klinger v. Department of Corrections, 31 F.3d 727 (8th Cir. 1994). 8 Atkins, supra note 1 , 250 Neb. at 320 , 549 N.W.2d at 163 . 9 Id. at 320-21 , 549 N.W.2d at 163 (citation omitted). - 355 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports STATE v. HIBLER Cite as 302 Neb. 325 In Atkins, we concluded it was unnecessary to reach the mer- its of the equal protection claim because we determined, as a threshold matter, that inmates in state prisons were not simi- larly situated to inmates in county jails. 2019Ed. 2d 313 (1985). 7 Klinger v. Department of Corrections, 31 F.3d 727 (8th Cir. 1994). 8 Atkins, supra note 1 , 250 Neb. at 320 , 549 N.W.2d at 163 . 9 Id. at 320-21 , 549 N.W.2d at 163 (citation omitted). - 355 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports STATE v. HIBLER Cite as 302 Neb. 325 In Atkins, we concluded it was unnecessary to reach the mer- its of the equal protection claim because we determined, as a threshold matter, that inmates in state prisons were not simi- larly situated to inmates in county jails. | 4 | 6 |
Batson v. Kentuckygreen2 sentences1991Ed. 2d 69 (1986), bars prosecutors, through application of the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, from challenging potential jurors “solely on account of their race or on the assumption that black jurors as a group will be unable impartially to consider the State’s case against a black defendant.” 476 U.S. at 89 . 1990In a case involving a challenge under the equal protection clause to a venire containing no Mexican-Americans, U.S. v. Garcia, 836 F.2d 385, 388 (8th Cir. 1987), the court stated: In Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 93-96 , 106 S.Ct. 1712, 1721-22 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), the Supreme Court recently reviewed the criteria for establishing a prima facie case of denial of equal protection in venire selection. | 2 | 7 |
REO Enters. v. Village of Dorchestergreen2 sentences2022See REO Enters. v. Village of Dorchester, 306 Neb. 683 , 947 N.W.2d 480 (2020). 2020The Golden court 40 Id. at 1541. 41 Id. at 1542. 42 Golden v. City of Columbus, 404 F.3d 950 (6th Cir. 2005). 43 O’Neal v. City of Seattle, 66 F.3d 1064 (9th Cir. 1995). 44 Golden, supra note 42 ; O’Neal, supra note 43. 45 Golden, supra note 42 . - 698 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 306 Nebraska Reports REO ENTERS. v. VILLAGE OF DORCHESTER Cite as 306 Neb. 683 analyzed the equal protection claim solely with regard to the city policy’s irrationally differential treatment of tenants whose landlords owed the city for water service and other tenants whose landlords did not have such debt. | 2 | 3 |
Hug v. City of Omahagreen2 sentences2022See Hug v. City of Omaha, 275 Neb. 820 , 749 N.W.2d 884 (2008). 2022See Hug v. City of Omaha, 275 Neb. 820 , 749 N.W.2d 884 (2008). | 2 | 2 |
Phillips v. Norrisgreen2 sentences2018See Phillips v. Norris, 320 F.3d 844 (8th Cir. 2003). 2018See Phillips v. Norris , 320 F.3d 844 (8th Cir. 2003). | 2 | 2 |
Huy Le v. Lautrupgreen2 sentences2006"In an equal protection challenge, when a fundamental right or suspect classification is not involved, the act is a valid exercise of police power if the act is rationally related to a legitimate governmental purpose." Le v. Lautrup, 271 Neb. 931 , 936 , 716 N.W.2d 713 , 719 (2006). 2006"In an equal protection challenge, when a fundamental right or suspect classification is not involved, the act is a valid exercise of police power if the act is rationally related to a legitimate governmental purpose." Le v. Lautrup, 271 Neb. 931 , 936 , 716 N.W.2d 713 , 719 (2006). | 1 | 3 |
Pfizer Inc. v. Lancaster County Board of Equalizationgreen2 sentences2001In describing the equal protection clause, the Court has stated: ". . . it simply keeps governmental decision makers from treating differently persons who are in all relevant respects alike." Pfizer v. Lancaster Board of Equalization , 260 Neb. 265 , 273 , 616 N.W.2d 326 , 335 (2000). 2001In describing the equal protection clause, the Court has stated: ". . . it simply keeps governmental decision makers from treating differently persons who are in all relevant respects alike." Pfizer v. Lancaster Board of Equalization , 260 Neb. 265 , 273 , 616 N.W.2d 326 , 335 (2000). | 1 | 3 |
Sioux City Bridge Co. v. Dakota Countygreen2 sentences1991See, Sioux City Bridge v. Dakota County, 260 U.S. 441 , 43 S. Ct. 190 , 67 L. 1991See, Sioux City Bridge v. Dakota County, 260 U.S. 441 , 43 S. Ct. 190 , 67 L. | 1 | 3 |
| cluster 705145green | 1 | 1 |
| Botsch v. Reisdorffgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Cushing v. Bernhardtgreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Lowegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Kuchar v. Kringsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Allegheny Pittsburgh Coal Co. v. Commission of Webster Cty.green | 1 | 1 |
| Cumberland Coal Co. v. Board of Revision of Tax Assessments in Greene Cty.green | 1 | 1 |
| Police Dept. of Chicago v. Mosleygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Doe v. Poritzgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| Engquist v. Oregon Department of Agriculturegreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
DeCoste v. City of Wahoo
green
2 sentences2000III , § 18 in the same equal protection analysis.) Prior to the amendments passage, the court has stated "The Nebraska Constitution and U.S. Constitution have identical requirements for equal protection challenges." DeCoste v. City of Wahoo , 583 N.W.2d 595 , 601 , 255 Neb. 266 , 274 (1998). 2000III , § 18 in the same equal protection analysis.) Prior to the amendments passage, the court has stated "The Nebraska Constitution and U.S. Constitution have identical requirements for equal protection challenges." DeCoste v. City of Wahoo , 583 N.W.2d 595 , 601 , 255 Neb. 266 , 274 (1998). | 5 | 2000–2020 |
Dandridge v. Williams
green
2 sentences1998Dandridge v. Williams , 397 U.S. 471 , 485 (1970); State v. Garber , 249 Neb. 648 , 545 N.W.2d 75 (1996); Distinctive Printing Packaging Co. v. Cox , 232 Neb. 846 , 443 N.W.2d 566 (1989). 1985Discussing the protection against discrimination afforded under the equal protection clause, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Dandridge v. Williams, 397 U.S. 471 , ___ (1970), stated: In the area of economics and social welfare, a State does not violate the Equal Protection Clause merely because the classifications made by its laws are imperfect. * * * A statutory discrimination will not be set aside if any state of facts reasonably may be conceived to justify it. | 5 | 1974–1998 |
State v. Hibler
green
2 sentences2020So, to note just a few examples, a plaintiff might claim that the government is committing an equal protection violation by treating people below a certain age differently than those above a certain age, see, e.g., State v. Hibler, 302 Neb. 325 , 923 N.W.2d 398 (2019); by treating males differently than females, see, e.g., Friehe v. Schaad, 249 Neb. 825 , 545 N.W.2d 740 (1996); or by treating people with one color of skin differently than those with another, see, e.g., Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 , 74 S. Ct. 686 , 98 L. 2020So, to note just a few examples, a plaintiff might claim that the government is committing an equal protection violation by treating people below a certain age differently than those above a certain age, see, e.g., State v. Hibler, 302 Neb. 325 , 923 N.W.2d 398 (2019); by treating males differently than females, see, e.g., Friehe v. Schaad, 249 Neb. 825 , 545 N.W.2d 740 (1996); or by treating people with one color of skin differently than those with another, see, e.g., Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 , 74 S. Ct. 686 , 98 L. | 4 | 2019–2020 |
Klinger v. Department Of Corrections
green
2 sentences2019Ed. 2d 313 (1985). 7 Klinger v. Department of Corrections, 31 F.3d 727 (8th Cir. 1994). 8 Atkins, supra note 1 , 250 Neb. at 320 , 549 N.W.2d at 163 . 9 Id. at 320-21 , 549 N.W.2d at 163 (citation omitted). - 355 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports STATE v. HIBLER Cite as 302 Neb. 325 In Atkins, we concluded it was unnecessary to reach the mer- its of the equal protection claim because we determined, as a threshold matter, that inmates in state prisons were not simi- larly situated to inmates in county jails. 2019Ed. 2d 313 (1985). 7 Klinger v. Department of Corrections, 31 F.3d 727 (8th Cir. 1994). 8 Atkins, supra note 1 , 250 Neb. at 320 , 549 N.W.2d at 163 . 9 Id. at 320-21 , 549 N.W.2d at 163 (citation omitted). - 355 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports STATE v. HIBLER Cite as 302 Neb. 325 In Atkins, we concluded it was unnecessary to reach the mer- its of the equal protection claim because we determined, as a threshold matter, that inmates in state prisons were not simi- larly situated to inmates in county jails. | 4 | 1998–2019 |
Hass v. Neth
green
2 sentences2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 | 4 | 2006–2019 |
Benitez v. Rasmussen
green
2 sentences2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 | 4 | 2003–2019 |
In Re Interest of JR
green
2 sentences2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 | 4 | 2009–2019 |
State v. Rung
green
2 sentences2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 | 4 | 2016–2019 |
Women Prisoners of the District of Columbia Department of Corrections v. District of Columbia
green
2 sentences2019Correct. v. D.C., 93 F.3d 910 (D.C. 2019Correct. v. D.C., 93 F.3d 910 (D.C. | 3 | 2019–2019 |
Bauers v. City of Lincoln
green
2 sentences2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 | 3 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Wendy A.
green
2 sentences2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 | 3 | 2019–2019 |
Gramercy Hill Enterprises v. State
neutral
2 sentences2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 | 3 | 2019–2019 |
Kenley v. Neth
green
2 sentences2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 | 3 | 2019–2019 |
In Re Interest of Phoenix L.
green
2 sentences2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 | 3 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Loyuk
green
2 sentences2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 2019Absent this threshold showing, there is not a 1 See, State v. Loyuk, 289 Neb. 967 , 857 N.W.2d 833 (2015); Sherman T. v. Karyn N., 286 Neb. 468 , 837 N.W.2d 746 (2013); State v. Harris, 284 Neb. 214 , 817 N.W.2d 258 (2012); State v. Rung, 278 Neb. 855 , 774 N.W.2d 621 (2009); In re Interest of J.R., 277 Neb. 362 , 762 N.W.2d 305 (2009); Henly v. Neth, 271 Neb. 402 , 712 N.W.2d 251 (2006); In re Interest of Phoenix L., 270 Neb. 870 , 708 N.W.2d 786 (2006), disapproved in part on other grounds, In re Interest of Destiny A. et al., 274 Neb. 713 , 742 N.W.2d 758 (2007); Hass v. Neth, 265 Neb. 321 | 3 | 2019–2019 |
City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.
green
2 sentences2018Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc. , 473 U.S. 432 , 105 S.Ct. 3249 , 87 L.Ed. 2d 313 (1985). 2018Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc. , 473 U.S. 432 , 105 S.Ct. 3249 , 87 L.Ed. 2d 313 (1985). | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Kadrmas v. Dickinson Public Schools
green
2 sentences2006The United States Supreme Court has said: "Unless a statute provokes `strict judicial scrutiny' because it interferes with a `fundamental right' or discriminates against a `suspect class,' it will ordinarily survive an equal protection attack so long as the challenged classification is rationally related to a legitimate governmental purpose." Kadrmas v. Dickinson Public Schools, 487 U.S. 450 , 457-58 (1988). 2006The United States Supreme Court has said: "Unless a statute provokes `strict judicial scrutiny' because it interferes with a `fundamental right' or discriminates against a `suspect class,' it will ordinarily survive an equal protection attack so long as the challenged classification is rationally related to a legitimate governmental purpose." Kadrmas v. Dickinson Public Schools, 487 U.S. 450 , 457-58 (1988). | 2 | 2006–2006 |
Metropolitan Casualty Ins. Co. v. Brownell
green
2 sentences2006Co. of New York v. Brownell, 294 U.S. 580 , 583 (1935), the Court set forth the proper analysis as follows: The equal protection clause does not prohibit legislative classification and the imposition of statutory restraints on one class which are not imposed on another. 2006Co. of New York v. Brownell, 294 U.S. 580 , 583 (1935), the Court set forth the proper analysis as follows: The equal protection clause does not prohibit legislative classification and the imposition of statutory restraints on one class which are not imposed on another. | 2 | 2006–2006 |
Hadley v. Junior College District of Metropolitan Kansas City
green
2 sentences1982The one-man, one-vote concept was explained in Hadley v. Junior College District of Metropolitan Kansas City, Missouri , 397 U.S. 50 , 90 S.Ct. 791 , 25 L.Ed.2d 45 (1970), wherein the court stated: As a general rule, whenever a state or local government decides to select persons by popular election to perform governmental functions, the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires that each qualified voter must be given an equal opportunity to participate in that election, and when members of an elected body are chosen from separate districts, each district must be established 1982The one-man, one-vote concept was explained in Hadley v. Junior College District of Metropolitan Kansas City, Missouri , 397 U.S. 50 , 90 S.Ct. 791 , 25 L.Ed.2d 45 (1970), wherein the court stated: As a general rule, whenever a state or local government decides to select persons by popular election to perform governmental functions, the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires that each qualified voter must be given an equal opportunity to participate in that election, and when members of an elected body are chosen from separate districts, each district must be established | 2 | 1979–1982 |
Township of Hillsborough v. Cromwell
green
2 sentences1979In Hillsborough Township v. Cromwell, 326 U.S. 620 , 90 L.Ed. 358 , 66 S.Ct. 445 (1945), the court said: "The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the individual from state action which selects him out for discriminatory treatment by subjecting him to taxes not imposed on others of the same class. 1979In Hillsborough Township v. Cromwell, 326 U.S. 620 , 90 L.Ed. 358 , 66 S.Ct. 445 (1945), the court said: "The equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the individual from state action which selects him out for discriminatory treatment by subjecting him to taxes not imposed on others of the same class. | 2 | 1976–1979 |
Brown v. Board of Education
green
2 sentences2020So, to note just a few examples, a plaintiff might claim that the government is committing an equal protection violation by treating people below a certain age differently than those above a certain age, see, e.g., State v. Hibler, 302 Neb. 325 , 923 N.W.2d 398 (2019); by treating males differently than females, see, e.g., Friehe v. Schaad, 249 Neb. 825 , 545 N.W.2d 740 (1996); or by treating people with one color of skin differently than those with another, see, e.g., Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 , 74 S. Ct. 686 , 98 L. 2020So, to note just a few examples, a plaintiff might claim that the government is committing an equal protection violation by treating people below a certain age differently than those above a certain age, see, e.g., State v. Hibler, 302 Neb. 325 , 923 N.W.2d 398 (2019); by treating males differently than females, see, e.g., Friehe v. Schaad, 249 Neb. 825 , 545 N.W.2d 740 (1996); or by treating people with one color of skin differently than those with another, see, e.g., Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 , 74 S. Ct. 686 , 98 L. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Barlow v. A. P. Smith Manufacturing Co. green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Hazel Golden v. City of Columbus Cheryl Roberto, Director of Public Utilities for the City of Columbus green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Friehe v. Schaad green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Montoya
green
1 sentence2020In requiring the written 10 See id. 11 DeCoste v. City of Wahoo, 255 Neb. 266 , 583 N.W.2d 595 (1998). 12 State v. Montoya, 304 Neb. 96 , 933 N.W.2d 558 (2019); Lingenfelter, supra note 6 . 13 See Lingenfelter, supra note 6 . 14 Id. - 690 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 306 Nebraska Reports REO ENTERS. v. VILLAGE OF DORCHESTER Cite as 306 Neb. 683 guarantee, Dorchester claims it has a legitimate interest in maintaining a financially stable municipal utility by collect- ing from tenants who abscond without paying their bills when those bills are in excess of the tenant’s security deposi | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Bryan M. v. Anne B. green | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| State v. Thompson green | 1 | 2006–2006 |
| Hall v. Progress Pig, Inc. green | 1 | 2006–2006 |
| State v. Alvarado green | 1 | 2006–2006 |
| Kreifels v. Wurtele neutral | 1 | 2006–2006 |
| Waste Connections of Nebraska, Inc. v. City of Lincoln green | 1 | 2006–2006 |
| Gourley Ex Rel. Gourley v. Nebraska Methodist Health System, Inc. green | 1 | 2005–2005 |
| Lerma v. Keck green | 1 | 2003–2003 |
| Etheridge v. Medical Center Hospitals green | 1 | 2003–2003 |
| Big John's Billiards, Inc. v. Balka green | 1 | 2003–2003 |
| Nordlinger v. Hahn green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| Allied Stores of Ohio, Inc. v. Bowers green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| Lehnhausen v. Lake Shore Auto Parts Co. green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| Schindler v. Department of Motor Vehicles green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| Exxon Corp. v. Eagerton green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.