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.
7 Nebraska opinions name it 2 courts 1990–2021 1 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. Woodgreen1 sentence2021Ed. 2d 18 (1976): First, the private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of addi- tional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the government’s interest, including the function involved and the fiscal and administra- tive burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail. - 392 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports STATE v. WOOD Cite as 310 Neb. 391 7. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nebraska. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Mathews v. Eldridge
green
2 sentences1991This determination includes weighing “the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail.” Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 , 96 S. Ct. 893 , 47 L. 1991This determination includes weighing “the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail.” Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 , 96 S. Ct. 893 , 47 L. | 5 | 1990–2020 |
In Re Interest of RG
green
2 sentences2000Id.; In re Interest of R.G., 238 Neb. 405 , 470 N.W.2d 780 (1991), citing Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 , 96 S. Ct. 893 , 47 L. 2000Id.; In re Interest of R.G., 238 Neb. 405 , 470 N.W.2d 780 (1991), citing Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 , 96 S. Ct. 893 , 47 L. | 2 | 1999–2000 |
Hass v. Neth
green
1 sentence2005Hass v. Neth, supra. Here, one governmental interest is the same as that articulated in Hass: a “substantial governmental interest in protecting public health and safety by removing drunken drivers from the highways.” 265 Neb. at 329, 657 N.W.2d at 21 . | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Shearer v. Leuenberger
green
2 sentences2000Id.; In re Interest of R.G., 238 Neb. 405 , 470 N.W.2d 780 (1991), citing Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 , 96 S.Ct. 893 , 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976). 256 Neb. at 592-93 , 591 N.W.2d at 777-78 . 2000Id.; In re Interest of R.G., 238 Neb. 405 , 470 N.W.2d 780 (1991), citing Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 , 96 S.Ct. 893 , 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976). 256 Neb. at 592-93 , 591 N.W.2d at 777-78 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
In re Bagley
green
2 sentences1999Id.; In re Interest of R.G., 238 Neb. 405 , 470 N.W.2d 780 (1991), citing Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 , 96 S.Ct. 893 , 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976). (a) Private Interest An individual's liberty interest in employment is clearly substantial, e.g., Petition of Preisendorfer, 719 A.2d 590 (N.H.1998), as is an individual's liberty interest in familial relationships, e.g., Petition of Bagley, 128 N.H. 275 , 513 A.2d 331 (1986). (b) Risk of Erroneous Deprivation Even more clear is the enormous risk of erroneous deprivation presented by allowing DSS to place names, and more importantly, its "case statu 1999Id.; In re Interest of R.G., 238 Neb. 405 , 470 N.W.2d 780 (1991), citing Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 , 96 S.Ct. 893 , 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976). (a) Private Interest An individual's liberty interest in employment is clearly substantial, e.g., Petition of Preisendorfer, 719 A.2d 590 (N.H.1998), as is an individual's liberty interest in familial relationships, e.g., Petition of Bagley, 128 N.H. 275 , 513 A.2d 331 (1986). (b) Risk of Erroneous Deprivation Even more clear is the enormous risk of erroneous deprivation presented by allowing DSS to place names, and more importantly, its "case statu | 1 | 1999–1999 |
In re Preisendorfer
green
1 sentence1999Id.; In re Interest of R.G., 238 Neb. 405 , 470 N.W.2d 780 (1991), citing Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 , 96 S.Ct. 893 , 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976). (a) Private Interest An individual's liberty interest in employment is clearly substantial, e.g., Petition of Preisendorfer, 719 A.2d 590 (N.H.1998), as is an individual's liberty interest in familial relationships, e.g., Petition of Bagley, 128 N.H. 275 , 513 A.2d 331 (1986). (b) Risk of Erroneous Deprivation Even more clear is the enormous risk of erroneous deprivation presented by allowing DSS to place names, and more importantly, its "case statu | 1 | 1999–1999 |
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.