Legal Opinion
Jacobitz v. Aurora Co-op
Nebraska Supreme Court
Decided December 27, 2013No. S-13-091PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Nebraska Advance Sheets JACOBITZ v. AURORA CO-OP 97 Cite as
287 Neb. 97
Even if we accept the finding of the district court that Brauer admitted he experienced an “adrenaline” rush as a result of touching J.N., such facts do not constitute proof that the touch was “for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification.” The key issue is not what sensation Brauer experienced after he touched the child, but, rather, what motivated him to touch J.N. in the first place. The only evidence of this is Brauer’s statement that he was reacting to the child’s striking him in the genitals in an effort to stop…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Dawes v. Wittrock Sandblasting & Painting, Inc.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2003
- Guico v. Excel Corp.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2000
- Larsen v. D B Feedyards, Inc.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2002
- Estate of Teague v. Crossroads Co-op Assn.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2013
- Risor v. Nebraska BoilerNebraska Supreme Court · 2009
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Cain v. Custer Cty. Bd. of Equal.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2015
- Martinez v. Cmr Constr. & Roofing of TexasNebraska Supreme Court · 2019
- Nichols v. NicholsNebraska Supreme Court · 2014
- Loyd v. Family Dollar Stores of Neb.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2020
- Moyers v. International Paper Co.Nebraska Court of Appeals · 2017
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.