In Re Invol. Dissol. of Battle Creek Bank
Nebraska Supreme Court
1DissentCaporale, J.
I respectfully dissent. It should be noted at the outset that the majority assumes a jurisdictional conflict which is not present. It may well be that had the Department of Banking and Finance taken possession of Battle Creek State Bank under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 8-187 (Reissue 1997), the district court would have no jurisdiction to entertain this action. But that is not the situation. It is only by ignoring that the department had not taken possession of the bank and by ignoring as well a number of well-*129established rules relating to the construction of statutes that the majority has converted…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Haman v. MarshNebraska Supreme Court · 1991
- Ledwith v. Bankers Life InsuranceNebraska Supreme Court · 1952
- State Ex Rel. Douglas v. ThoneNebraska Supreme Court · 1979
- Lauritzen v. DavisNebraska Supreme Court · 1983
- Bargmann v. Soll Oil Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1998
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.