Legal Opinion

Adam v. City of Hastings

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided March 26, 2004No. S-01-1014PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMiller-Lerman, J.

NATURE OF CASE

Appellants are landowners and residents in the Lochland Sanitary and Improvement District, located north of Hastings, Nebraska (the Lochland property). The Lochland Sanitary and Improvement District is not a party to this case. In city ordinance No. 3718, the City of Hastings, Nebraska (the City), appellee, purported to annex the Lochland property. In city ordinance No. 3740, the City purported to annex land owned by Colleen Adam and others. U.S. Highway 281 runs north-south in the area in question. The land annexed under ordinance No. 3740 lies to the east of Highway 281. The…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Chambers v. LautenbaughNebraska Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Sanitary & Improvement District 57 v. City of ElkhornNebraska Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Wagner v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1952
  4. In the Interest of C.M.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2002
  5. Crosby v. LuehrsNebraska Supreme Court · 2003

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Myers v. Nebraska Investment CouncilNebraska Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Marcuzzo v. Bank of the WestNebraska Supreme Court · 2015
  3. In Re Application of Metro. Util. Dist.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2005
  4. State v. Heather N. (In Re Michael N.)Nebraska Supreme Court · 2019
  5. County of Sarpy v. City of GretnaNebraska Supreme Court · 2004

13 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