estate claim in Nebraska

2022Langley was not obligated to indemnify the City in the event the Estate’s claim was successful, because the wrongful death 88 42 C.J.S. supra note 75. 89 See Kuhn v. Wells Fargo Bank of Neb., supra note 81 . - 557 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 311 Nebraska Reports DION v. CITY OF OMAHA Cite as 311 Neb. 522 claim, relying on allegations of negligence against the City, was outside the Agreement.

2022Langley was not obligated to indemnify the City in the event the Estate’s claim was successful, because the wrongful death 88 42 C.J.S. supra note 75. 89 See Kuhn v. Wells Fargo Bank of Neb., supra note 81. - 557 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 311 Nebraska Reports DION v. CITY OF OMAHA Cite as 311 Neb. 522 claim, relying on allegations of negligence against the City, was outside the Agreement.

2025The State, in turn, observed that the court hearing the wrongful death suit had granted the Estate’s motion for pre- judgment attachment upon Allen’s assets, including “all auto- mobiles, real estate, firearms/weapons” owned by him or in his 1 See State v. Allen, 314 Neb. 663 , 992 N.W.2d 712 (2023), modified on denial of rehearing 315 Neb. 255 , 995 N.W.2d 446 . 2 See Allen v. Nebraska, ___ U.S. ___, 144 S. Ct. 1070 , 218 L.

2025The State, in turn, observed that the court hearing the wrongful death suit had granted the Estate’s motion for pre- judgment attachment upon Allen’s assets, including “all auto- mobiles, real estate, firearms/weapons” owned by him or in his 1 See State v. Allen, 314 Neb. 663 , 992 N.W.2d 712 (2023), modified on denial of rehearing 315 Neb. 255 , 995 N.W.2d 446 . 2 See Allen v. Nebraska, ___ U.S. ___, 144 S. Ct. 1070 , 218 L.

2025The State, in turn, observed that the court hearing the wrongful death suit had granted the Estate’s motion for pre- judgment attachment upon Allen’s assets, including “all auto- mobiles, real estate, firearms/weapons” owned by him or in his 1 See State v. Allen, 314 Neb. 663 , 992 N.W.2d 712 (2023), modified on denial of rehearing 315 Neb. 255 , 995 N.W.2d 446 . 2 See Allen v. Nebraska, ___ U.S. ___, 144 S. Ct. 1070 , 218 L.

2018At the pretrial hearing, the Estate argued that “the - 468 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 299 Nebraska R eports HEMSLEY v. LANGDON Cite as 299 Neb. 464 Court has . . . no information before it on what method- ologies [the doctors’ expert witnesses] used nor how they applied them nor how did they arrive at a logical conclusion.” The Estate further argued that the expert witnesses testified “about education, training, and experience,” but that under federal and state case law (Daubert/Schafersman),1 “[t]hey still must disclose the methodologies and . . . the reasoning that they used.”

2018The court stated that the Estate’s objection was overruled “for the same reason it was previously overruled prior to trial.” We find no error in the district court’s determination that the testimony provided by the witnesses would assist the jury in understanding and determining the facts at issue in - 480 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 299 Nebraska R eports HEMSLEY v. LANGDON Cite as 299 Neb. 464 this case.

2015We first address the estate’s claim that the buyout was void because Johnson lacked an insurable interest in Minnick’s life. [6-9] At common law, life insurance policies issued to a party not having an insurable interest in the life of an insured are considered a wager on the life of another and therefore 4 See Mohrlang v. Draper, 219 Neb. 630 , 365 N.W.2d 443 (1985). 5 Satellite Dev.

2015We first address the estate’s claim that the buyout was void because Johnson lacked an insurable interest in Minnick’s life. [6-9] At common law, life insurance policies issued to a party not having an insurable interest in the life of an insured are considered a wager on the life of another and therefore 4 See Mohrlang v. Draper, 219 Neb. 630 , 365 N.W.2d 443 (1985). 5 Satellite Dev.

1985In In re Estate of Feuerhelm, 215 Neb. 872 , 341 N.W.2d 342 (1983), this court considered whether a “STATEMENT OF CLAIM” filed against an estate was a claim within the limitations of Neb.

1985In In re Estate of Feuerhelm, 215 Neb. 872 , 341 N.W.2d 342 (1983), this court considered whether a “STATEMENT OF CLAIM” filed against an estate was a claim within the limitations of Neb.

1957R. 1182, citing Overlander v. Ware, 102 Neb. 216 , 166 N. W. 611 , and other authorities, it is said: “Estoppel to assert against a decedent’s estate a claim antedating the decedent’s death has been held to arise from statements or conduct on the part of the' claimant inconsistent with such assertion.” In Overlander v. Ware, supra, this court said: “If Clark had believed, when Kelly died, that under the contract he was the owner of all the property, it is natural to suppose that he’ would have at once made claim to it upon the ground, as he was in duty and law bound to do if such was his claim

1957R. 1182, citing Overlander v. Ware, 102 Neb. 216 , 166 N. W. 611 , and other authorities, it is said: “Estoppel to assert against a decedent’s estate a claim antedating the decedent’s death has been held to arise from statements or conduct on the part of the' claimant inconsistent with such assertion.” In Overlander v. Ware, supra, this court said: “If Clark had believed, when Kelly died, that under the contract he was the owner of all the property, it is natural to suppose that he’ would have at once made claim to it upon the ground, as he was in duty and law bound to do if such was his claim