Legal Opinion
Sanitary & Improvement District No. 384 v. Bruhns Packing Co.
Nebraska Supreme Court
Decided April 27, 2000No. S-99-904PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.
NATURE OF CASE
Bruhns Packing Company (BPC) appeals from an eminent domain award in the amount of $40,000. BPC asserts that it was not properly compensated for the taking of its land for public use because it was not allowed to introduce evidence regarding the loss of trees and grasses resulting from the condemnation.
SCOPE OF REVIEW
In proceedings where the Nebraska Evidence Rules apply, the admissibility of evidence is controlled by said rules; judicial discretion is involved only when the rules make such discretion a factor in determining admissibility. Gittins v. Scholl, 258 Neb. 18, 601…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Holste v. Burlington Northern RailroadNebraska Supreme Court · 1999
- Gledhill v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1932
- Zimmerman v. FirsTier Bank, N.A.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1998
- Shearer v. LeuenbergerNebraska Supreme Court · 1999
- Walkenhorst v. State, Department of RoadsNebraska Supreme Court · 1998
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Nebraska Nutrients, Inc. v. ShepherdNebraska Supreme Court · 2001
- Rupert v. City of Rapid CitySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
- Sharkey v. Board of RegentsNebraska Supreme Court · 2000
- Ptak v. SwansonNebraska Supreme Court · 2006
- Austin v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 2001
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.