6 Nebraska opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2026 3 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. Lessleygreen2 sentences2026See, also, State v. Lessley, 312 Neb. 316 , 978 N.W.2d 620 (2022). 23 State v. Thorpe, 290 Neb. 149, 155 , 858 N.W.2d 880 , 887 (2015). 24 See State v. Ramsay, supra note 2 . 25 State v. German, supra note 1 , 316 Neb. at 858 , 7 N.W.3d at 222. - 675 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 321 Nebraska Reports STATE v. GERMAN Cite as 321 Neb. 652 German ignores that the trial court also instructed, as an ele- ment of aiding and abetting, that he must be found to have “intentionally encouraged or intentionally helped another per- son to commit the crime” and “intended that the crime be committe 2026See, also, State v. Lessley, 312 Neb. 316 , 978 N.W.2d 620 (2022). 23 State v. Thorpe, 290 Neb. 149, 155 , 858 N.W.2d 880 , 887 (2015). 24 See State v. Ramsay, supra note 2 . 25 State v. German, supra note 1 , 316 Neb. at 858 , 7 N.W.3d at 222. - 675 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 321 Nebraska Reports STATE v. GERMAN Cite as 321 Neb. 652 German ignores that the trial court also instructed, as an ele- ment of aiding and abetting, that he must be found to have “intentionally encouraged or intentionally helped another per- son to commit the crime” and “intended that the crime be committe | 1 | 1 |
State v. Germangreen1 sentence2026See, also, State v. Lessley, 312 Neb. 316 , 978 N.W.2d 620 (2022). 23 State v. Thorpe, 290 Neb. 149, 155 , 858 N.W.2d 880 , 887 (2015). 24 See State v. Ramsay, supra note 2 . 25 State v. German, supra note 1 , 316 Neb. at 858 , 7 N.W.3d at 222. - 675 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 321 Nebraska Reports STATE v. GERMAN Cite as 321 Neb. 652 German ignores that the trial court also instructed, as an ele- ment of aiding and abetting, that he must be found to have “intentionally encouraged or intentionally helped another per- son to commit the crime” and “intended that the crime be committe | 1 | 1 |
cluster 10880775green1 sentence2026See, also, State v. Lessley, 312 Neb. 316 , 978 N.W.2d 620 (2022). 23 State v. Thorpe, 290 Neb. 149, 155 , 858 N.W.2d 880 , 887 (2015). 24 See State v. Ramsay, supra note 2 . 25 State v. German, supra note 1 , 316 Neb. at 858 , 7 N.W.3d at 222. - 675 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 321 Nebraska Reports STATE v. GERMAN Cite as 321 Neb. 652 German ignores that the trial court also instructed, as an ele- ment of aiding and abetting, that he must be found to have “intentionally encouraged or intentionally helped another per- son to commit the crime” and “intended that the crime be committe | 1 | 1 |
State v. Thorpegreen1 sentence2026See, also, State v. Lessley, 312 Neb. 316 , 978 N.W.2d 620 (2022). 23 State v. Thorpe, 290 Neb. 149, 155 , 858 N.W.2d 880 , 887 (2015). 24 See State v. Ramsay, supra note 2 . 25 State v. German, supra note 1 , 316 Neb. at 858 , 7 N.W.3d at 222. - 675 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 321 Nebraska Reports STATE v. GERMAN Cite as 321 Neb. 652 German ignores that the trial court also instructed, as an ele- ment of aiding and abetting, that he must be found to have “intentionally encouraged or intentionally helped another per- son to commit the crime” and “intended that the crime be committe | 1 | 1 |
Weaver v. Royal Insurance Co. of Americagreen2 sentences2013Co. of America, 140 N.H. 780, 783 , 674 A.2d 975 (1996) (“Whether the transporting of lead dust from the work site to the Weavers’ car and home was the ‘discharge, dispersal, release or escape’ of a pollutant is not clear.”) Since ambiguity exists regarding this aspect of the clause’s application, Danbury cannot prevail on its motion for summary judgment. 2013Co. of America, 140 N.H. 780, 783 , 674 A.2d 975 (1996) (“Whether the transporting of lead dust from the work site to the Weavers’ car and home was the ‘discharge, dispersal, release or escape’ of a pollutant is not clear.”) Since ambiguity exists regarding this aspect of the clause’s application, Danbury cannot prevail on its motion for summary judgment. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nebraska. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Hinrichsen
green
2 sentences2025I believe the due process implications of the step instruction in a first degree murder case warrant revisit- ing, as elucidated in the dissent in State v. Hinrichsen, 292 Neb. 611 , 877 N.W.2d 211 (2016) (Connolly, J., dissent- ing; Miller‑Lerman, J., joins). 2025I believe the due process implications of the step instruction in a first degree murder case warrant revisit- ing, as elucidated in the dissent in State v. Hinrichsen, 292 Neb. 611 , 877 N.W.2d 211 (2016) (Connolly, J., dissent- ing; Miller‑Lerman, J., joins). | 2 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Dubray
green
2 sentences2026Regardless of whether appellate counsel clearly argued a connection between the allegedly erroneous aiding and abetting instruction and the allegedly errone- ous kidnapping instruction, we will not revisit our holding on direct appeal that the aiding and abetting instructions were correct statements of the law and consistent with the requirement in Ramsay that an aider and abettor must have either possessed the required intent or known the perpetrator possessed the required intent. 24 In fact, we “discern[ed] no significant difference” between the instruction given and the one trial counsel te 2026Regardless of whether appellate counsel clearly argued a connection between the allegedly erroneous aiding and abetting instruction and the allegedly errone- ous kidnapping instruction, we will not revisit our holding on direct appeal that the aiding and abetting instructions were correct statements of the law and consistent with the requirement in Ramsay that an aider and abettor must have either possessed the required intent or known the perpetrator possessed the required intent. 24 In fact, we “discern[ed] no significant difference” between the instruction given and the one trial counsel te | 1 | 2026–2026 |
State v. York
green
2 sentences2026Regardless of whether appellate counsel clearly argued a connection between the allegedly erroneous aiding and abetting instruction and the allegedly errone- ous kidnapping instruction, we will not revisit our holding on direct appeal that the aiding and abetting instructions were correct statements of the law and consistent with the requirement in Ramsay that an aider and abettor must have either possessed the required intent or known the perpetrator possessed the required intent. 24 In fact, we “discern[ed] no significant difference” between the instruction given and the one trial counsel te 2026Regardless of whether appellate counsel clearly argued a connection between the allegedly erroneous aiding and abetting instruction and the allegedly errone- ous kidnapping instruction, we will not revisit our holding on direct appeal that the aiding and abetting instructions were correct statements of the law and consistent with the requirement in Ramsay that an aider and abettor must have either possessed the required intent or known the perpetrator possessed the required intent. 24 In fact, we “discern[ed] no significant difference” between the instruction given and the one trial counsel te | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Chambers v. Mississippi
green
1 sentence2006The Court determined the defendant should have been permitted to present the third party’s confessional statements, which “were originally made and subsequently offered at trial under circumstances that provided considerable assurance of their reliability.” Chambers v. Mississippi, 410 U.S. at 300 . | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Buell, Winter, Mousel & Associates, Inc. v. Olmsted & Perry Consulting Engineers, Inc.
green
2 sentences1994Katskee v. Nevada Bob’s Golf of Neb., 238 Neb. 654 , 472 N.W.2d 372 (1991); Buell, Winter, Mousel & Assoc. v. Olmsted & Perry, 227 Neb. 770 , 420 N.W.2d 280 (1988). 1994Katskee v. Nevada Bob’s Golf of Neb., 238 Neb. 654 , 472 N.W.2d 372 (1991); Buell, Winter, Mousel & Assoc. v. Olmsted & Perry, 227 Neb. 770 , 420 N.W.2d 280 (1988). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Katskee v. Nevada Bob's Golf of Nebraska, Inc.
green
2 sentences1994Katskee v. Nevada Bob’s Golf of Neb., 238 Neb. 654 , 472 N.W.2d 372 (1991); Buell, Winter, Mousel & Assoc. v. Olmsted & Perry, 227 Neb. 770 , 420 N.W.2d 280 (1988). 1994Katskee v. Nevada Bob’s Golf of Neb., 238 Neb. 654 , 472 N.W.2d 372 (1991); Buell, Winter, Mousel & Assoc. v. Olmsted & Perry, 227 Neb. 770 , 420 N.W.2d 280 (1988). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.