Legal Opinion

Hynes v. Good Samaritan Hosp.

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided May 24, 2013No. S-12-810PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Nebraska Advance Sheets HYNES v. GOOD SAMARITAN HOSP. 985 Cite as

285 Neb. 985

from using a written contract to effectuate the fraud committed. In other words, DMK and Lanoha contend that the substantive law protects securities purchasers from sellers by refusing to enforce exculpatory clauses in prospectuses, private placement memorandums, or subscription agreements. This issue was not addressed by the district court. An issue not presented to or decided on by the trial court is not an appropriate issue for consideration on appeal.32 Furthermore, determining this issue is not necessary to our…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. J.B. Contracting Services, Inc. v. Universal Surety Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Jones v. City of ChadronNebraska Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Latenser v. Intercessors of the Lamb, Inc.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Huddleson v. AbramsonNebraska Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Sanwick v. JensonNebraska Supreme Court · 1993

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. DMK Biodiesel v. McCoyNebraska Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Hynes v. Good Samaritan Hosp.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2015
  3. In re Estate of RadfordNebraska Supreme Court · 2017
  4. Potter v. McCullaNebraska Supreme Court · 2014
  5. State v. MaloneNebraska Supreme Court · 2021

14 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