Legal Opinion · Dissent

Caniglia v. City of Omaha

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided January 22, 1982No. 43621Published

1DissentKrivosha, C.J.

I find that, upon further consideration of this matter, I must respectfully dissent. The majority’s opinion is, in part, based upon the court’s conclusion that we cannot take judicial notice of § 6.04(7) of the home rule charter of the City of Omaha, and cites as authority for that position Dell v. City of Lincoln, 168 Neb. 174, 95 N.W.2d 336 (1959). It is with that aspect of the opinion that I disagree. While it is true, as noted by the majority, that a court of original jurisdiction, in the first instance, and an appellate court, on review, will not take judicial notice of a municipal…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Elmen v. State Board of Equalization & AssessmentNebraska Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Young v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1948
  3. State ex rel. Douglas County v. FrankNebraska Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Hornberger v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
  5. Dell v. City of LincolnNebraska Supreme Court · 1959

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API