assertion of sovereign immunity in Nebraska

2022Under 13 See State v. Hofmann, 310 Neb. 609 , 967 N.W.2d 435 (2021). 14 See, Seivert v. Alli, 309 Neb. 246 , 959 N.W.2d 777 (2021); State ex rel.

2022Under 13 See State v. Hofmann, 310 Neb. 609 , 967 N.W.2d 435 (2021). 14 See, Seivert v. Alli, 309 Neb. 246 , 959 N.W.2d 777 (2021); State ex rel.

2022Cite as 311 Neb. 123 based on the assertion of sovereign immunity, and no one challenged that characterization.

2022Cite as 311 Neb. 123 r­ equirements are not jurisdictional, 25 and thus do not bear directly on the question of sovereign immunity. 26 [17] As such, we hold that when the State or a political sub- division moves for summary judgment asserting the failure to comply with the presuit claim procedures of the STCA or the PSTCA, the motion is not “based on the assertion of sovereign immunity” for purposes of § 25-1902(1)(d).

2022Under 13 See State v. Hofmann, 310 Neb. 609 , 967 N.W.2d 435 (2021). 14 See, Seivert v. Alli, 309 Neb. 246 , 959 N.W.2d 777 (2021); State ex rel.

2022Under 13 See State v. Hofmann, 310 Neb. 609 , 967 N.W.2d 435 (2021). 14 See, Seivert v. Alli, 309 Neb. 246 , 959 N.W.2d 777 (2021); State ex rel.

2025ALLEN Cite as 318 Neb. 904 per § 25-1902(1)(b). 17 Nor were the orders made on a sum- mary application after a judgment or on a motion for summary judgment based on the assertion of sovereign immunity or the immunity of a government official, per § 25-1902(1)(c) and (d).

2024JACKSON Cite as 317 Neb. 141 most favorable to the nonmoving party and drawing all reason- able inferences in that party’s favor. 5 ANALYSIS Before reaching the merits of the State Officials’ arguments regarding taxpayer standing and the UDJA, we must first address whether we have jurisdiction over this appeal. 6 [2,3] The general rule is that an order denying summary judgment is not a final, appealable order. 7 But the Legislature carved out a limited exception to this general rule when it enacted § 25-1902(1)(d) to create a new category of final orders for purposes of appeal. 8 Specifically,

2024JACKSON Cite as 317 Neb. 141 on the assertion of sovereign immunity because it stated only that there were no genuine issues of material fact. 32 The plaintiff also observed that the political subdivision made no mention of immunity in its statement of material facts. 33 We disagreed. 34 We found that the “substance” of the motion “as argued in both parties’ briefing and as addressed by the district court” presented a claim of sovereign immunity. 35 In so find- ing, we also observed that the political subdivision alleged sovereign immunity as a defense in its answer. 36 In light of Clark and S

2024Healthy Blue argues that the State Officials’ motion was not actually based on sovereign immunity, but, rather, it 5 Griffith v. LG Chem America, 315 Neb. 892 , 1 N.W.3d 899 (2024). 6 See Simpson v. Lincoln Public Schools, 316 Neb. 246 , 4 N.W.3d 172 (2024) (before reaching legal issues presented for review, it is duty of appellate court to determine whether it has jurisdiction over matter). 7 Id. 8 Id. 9 Clark v. Sargent Irr.

2023Supp. 2022), the four types of final orders that may be reviewed on appeal are (1) an order which affects a substantial right in an action and which in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment, (2) an order affecting a substantial right made during a special proceeding, (3) an order affecting a substantial right made on summary application in an action after a judgment is rendered, and (4) an order denying a motion for summary judgment when such motion is based on the assertion of sovereign immunity or the immunity of a government official. 5 1 In re Interest of Zachary B., 299 Neb

2023V, § 2, the Nebraska Supreme Court exercises appellate jurisdiction. 26 For an appel- late court to acquire jurisdiction of an appeal, the party must be appealing from a final order or a judgment. 27 Under § 25-1902, the four types of final orders which may be reviewed on appeal are (1) an order affecting a substantial right in an action, when such order in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment; (2) an order affecting a sub- stantial right made during a special proceeding; (3) an order affecting a substantial right made on summary application in an action after a judgment is ent

2023Cite as 313 Neb. 385 We read § 71-1118(8) of the DDCCA, which provides that the subject of a petition has the right “to appeal a final decision of the court,” as incorporating the rules of appealability in civil matters, including § 25-1902.

2023Supp. 2022), the four types of final orders that may be reviewed on appeal are (1) an order which affects a substantial right in an action and which in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment, (2) an order affecting a substantial right made during a special proceeding, (3) an order affecting a substantial right made on summary application in an action after a judgment is rendered, and (4) an order denying a motion for summary judgment when such motion is based on the assertion of sovereign immunity or the immunity of a government official. 5 1 In re Interest of Zachary B., 299 Neb

2023Supp. 2022), the four types of final orders that may be reviewed on appeal are (1) an order which affects a substantial right in an action and which in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment, (2) an order affecting a substantial right made during a special proceeding, (3) an order affecting a substantial right made on summary application in an action after a judgment is rendered, and (4) an order denying a motion for summary judgment when such motion is based on the assertion of sovereign immunity or the immunity of a government official. 5 1 In re Interest of Zachary B., 299 Neb

2023Supp. 2022), the four types of final orders that may be reviewed on appeal are (1) an order which affects a substantial right in an action and which in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment, (2) an order affecting a substantial right made during a special proceeding, (3) an order affecting a substantial right made on summary application in an action after a judgment is rendered, and (4) an order denying a motion for summary judgment when such motion is based on the assertion of sovereign immunity or the immunity of a government official. 5 1 In re Interest of Zachary B., 299 Neb

2023Supp. 2022), the four types of final orders that may be reviewed on appeal are (1) an order which affects a substantial right in an action and which in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment, (2) an order affecting a substantial right made during a special proceeding, (3) an order affecting a substantial right made on summary application in an action after a judgment is rendered, and (4) an order denying a motion for summary judgment when such motion is based on the assertion of sovereign immunity or the immunity of a government official. 5 1 In re Interest of Zachary B., 299 Neb

2023Supp. 2022), the four types of final orders that may be reviewed on appeal are (1) an order which affects a substantial right in an action and which in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment, (2) an order affecting a substantial right made during a special proceeding, (3) an order affecting a substantial right made on summary application in an action after a judgment is rendered, and (4) an order denying a motion for summary judgment when such motion is based on the assertion of sovereign immunity or the immunity of a government official. 5 1 In re Interest of Zachary B., 299 Neb

2023V, § 2, the Nebraska Supreme Court exercises appellate jurisdiction. 26 For an appel- late court to acquire jurisdiction of an appeal, the party must be appealing from a final order or a judgment. 27 Under § 25-1902, the four types of final orders which may be reviewed on appeal are (1) an order affecting a substantial right in an action, when such order in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment; (2) an order affecting a sub- stantial right made during a special proceeding; (3) an order affecting a substantial right made on summary application in an action after a judgment is ent

2023V, § 2, the Nebraska Supreme Court exercises appellate jurisdiction. 26 For an appel- late court to acquire jurisdiction of an appeal, the party must be appealing from a final order or a judgment. 27 Under § 25-1902, the four types of final orders which may be reviewed on appeal are (1) an order affecting a substantial right in an action, when such order in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment; (2) an order affecting a sub- stantial right made during a special proceeding; (3) an order affecting a substantial right made on summary application in an action after a judgment is ent

2023V, § 2, the Nebraska Supreme Court exercises appellate jurisdiction. 26 For an appel- late court to acquire jurisdiction of an appeal, the party must be appealing from a final order or a judgment. 27 Under § 25-1902, the four types of final orders which may be reviewed on appeal are (1) an order affecting a substantial right in an action, when such order in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment; (2) an order affecting a sub- stantial right made during a special proceeding; (3) an order affecting a substantial right made on summary application in an action after a judgment is ent

2023V, § 2, the Nebraska Supreme Court exercises appellate jurisdiction. 26 For an appel- late court to acquire jurisdiction of an appeal, the party must be appealing from a final order or a judgment. 27 Under § 25-1902, the four types of final orders which may be reviewed on appeal are (1) an order affecting a substantial right in an action, when such order in effect determines the action and prevents a judgment; (2) an order affecting a sub- stantial right made during a special proceeding; (3) an order affecting a substantial right made on summary application in an action after a judgment is ent

2020The law authorizes the fee application so 27 Heckman v. Marchio, 296 Neb. 458 , 894 N.W.2d 296 (2017). 28 See State v. Kelley, 305 Neb. 409 , 940 N.W.2d 568 (2020). 29 See State v. Jacques, 253 Neb. 247 , 570 N.W.2d 331 (1997). 30 In re Estate of Abbott-Ochsner, 299 Neb. 596 , 910 N.W.2d 504 (2018). 31 Jacques, supra note 29 , 253 Neb. at 253 , 570 N.W.2d at 336 . - 361 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 307 Nebraska Reports IN RE CLAIM OF ROBERTS FOR ATTORNEY FEES Cite as 307 Neb. 346 that appointed counsel can enforce the right to be compensated for services rendered, and the applicatio

2020The law authorizes the fee application so 27 Heckman v. Marchio, 296 Neb. 458 , 894 N.W.2d 296 (2017). 28 See State v. Kelley, 305 Neb. 409 , 940 N.W.2d 568 (2020). 29 See State v. Jacques, 253 Neb. 247 , 570 N.W.2d 331 (1997). 30 In re Estate of Abbott-Ochsner, 299 Neb. 596 , 910 N.W.2d 504 (2018). 31 Jacques, supra note 29 , 253 Neb. at 253 , 570 N.W.2d at 336 . - 361 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 307 Nebraska Reports IN RE CLAIM OF ROBERTS FOR ATTORNEY FEES Cite as 307 Neb. 346 that appointed counsel can enforce the right to be compensated for services rendered, and the applicatio

2020The law authorizes the fee application so 27 Heckman v. Marchio, 296 Neb. 458 , 894 N.W.2d 296 (2017). 28 See State v. Kelley, 305 Neb. 409 , 940 N.W.2d 568 (2020). 29 See State v. Jacques, 253 Neb. 247 , 570 N.W.2d 331 (1997). 30 In re Estate of Abbott-Ochsner, 299 Neb. 596 , 910 N.W.2d 504 (2018). 31 Jacques, supra note 29 , 253 Neb. at 253 , 570 N.W.2d at 336 . - 361 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 307 Nebraska Reports IN RE CLAIM OF ROBERTS FOR ATTORNEY FEES Cite as 307 Neb. 346 that appointed counsel can enforce the right to be compensated for services rendered, and the applicatio

2020The law authorizes the fee application so 27 Heckman v. Marchio, 296 Neb. 458 , 894 N.W.2d 296 (2017). 28 See State v. Kelley, 305 Neb. 409 , 940 N.W.2d 568 (2020). 29 See State v. Jacques, 253 Neb. 247 , 570 N.W.2d 331 (1997). 30 In re Estate of Abbott-Ochsner, 299 Neb. 596 , 910 N.W.2d 504 (2018). 31 Jacques, supra note 29 , 253 Neb. at 253 , 570 N.W.2d at 336 . - 361 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 307 Nebraska Reports IN RE CLAIM OF ROBERTS FOR ATTORNEY FEES Cite as 307 Neb. 346 that appointed counsel can enforce the right to be compensated for services rendered, and the applicatio

2020The law authorizes the fee application so 27 Heckman v. Marchio, 296 Neb. 458 , 894 N.W.2d 296 (2017). 28 See State v. Kelley, 305 Neb. 409 , 940 N.W.2d 568 (2020). 29 See State v. Jacques, 253 Neb. 247 , 570 N.W.2d 331 (1997). 30 In re Estate of Abbott-Ochsner, 299 Neb. 596 , 910 N.W.2d 504 (2018). 31 Jacques, supra note 29 , 253 Neb. at 253 , 570 N.W.2d at 336 . - 361 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 307 Nebraska Reports IN RE CLAIM OF ROBERTS FOR ATTORNEY FEES Cite as 307 Neb. 346 that appointed counsel can enforce the right to be compensated for services rendered, and the applicatio

2020Co., 280 Neb. 591 , 788 N.W.2d 538 (2010). 16 See § 25-1902. 17 See State v. Fredrickson, supra note 6 . 18 See id. 19 See id. 20 Id. 21 Id. 22 Id. - 488 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 307 Nebraska Reports CINATL v. PROSOSKI Cite as 307 Neb. 477 Prososki contends that Cinatl needed to file an appeal from the order denying the application to vacate the arbitrator’s award.

2020The law authorizes the fee application so 27 Heckman v. Marchio, 296 Neb. 458 , 894 N.W.2d 296 (2017). 28 See State v. Kelley, 305 Neb. 409 , 940 N.W.2d 568 (2020). 29 See State v. Jacques, 253 Neb. 247 , 570 N.W.2d 331 (1997). 30 In re Estate of Abbott-Ochsner, 299 Neb. 596 , 910 N.W.2d 504 (2018). 31 Jacques, supra note 29 , 253 Neb. at 253 , 570 N.W.2d at 336 . - 361 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 307 Nebraska Reports IN RE CLAIM OF ROBERTS FOR ATTORNEY FEES Cite as 307 Neb. 346 that appointed counsel can enforce the right to be compensated for services rendered, and the applicatio

2020The law authorizes the fee application so 27 Heckman v. Marchio, 296 Neb. 458 , 894 N.W.2d 296 (2017). 28 See State v. Kelley, 305 Neb. 409 , 940 N.W.2d 568 (2020). 29 See State v. Jacques, 253 Neb. 247 , 570 N.W.2d 331 (1997). 30 In re Estate of Abbott-Ochsner, 299 Neb. 596 , 910 N.W.2d 504 (2018). 31 Jacques, supra note 29 , 253 Neb. at 253 , 570 N.W.2d at 336 . - 361 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 307 Nebraska Reports IN RE CLAIM OF ROBERTS FOR ATTORNEY FEES Cite as 307 Neb. 346 that appointed counsel can enforce the right to be compensated for services rendered, and the applicatio

2020The law authorizes the fee application so 27 Heckman v. Marchio, 296 Neb. 458 , 894 N.W.2d 296 (2017). 28 See State v. Kelley, 305 Neb. 409 , 940 N.W.2d 568 (2020). 29 See State v. Jacques, 253 Neb. 247 , 570 N.W.2d 331 (1997). 30 In re Estate of Abbott-Ochsner, 299 Neb. 596 , 910 N.W.2d 504 (2018). 31 Jacques, supra note 29 , 253 Neb. at 253 , 570 N.W.2d at 336 . - 361 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 307 Nebraska Reports IN RE CLAIM OF ROBERTS FOR ATTORNEY FEES Cite as 307 Neb. 346 that appointed counsel can enforce the right to be compensated for services rendered, and the applicatio

2020The law authorizes the fee application so 27 Heckman v. Marchio, 296 Neb. 458 , 894 N.W.2d 296 (2017). 28 See State v. Kelley, 305 Neb. 409 , 940 N.W.2d 568 (2020). 29 See State v. Jacques, 253 Neb. 247 , 570 N.W.2d 331 (1997). 30 In re Estate of Abbott-Ochsner, 299 Neb. 596 , 910 N.W.2d 504 (2018). 31 Jacques, supra note 29 , 253 Neb. at 253 , 570 N.W.2d at 336 . - 361 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 307 Nebraska Reports IN RE CLAIM OF ROBERTS FOR ATTORNEY FEES Cite as 307 Neb. 346 that appointed counsel can enforce the right to be compensated for services rendered, and the applicatio