Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bluff's Vision Clinic, P.C. v. Krzyzanowski

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1996No. S-94-787Published

1Dissent

Caporale, 1,

dissenting.

I disagree. The majority rests its decision of first impression under the Nebraska Fair Employment Practice Act, Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 48-1101 through 48-1126 (Reissue 1993), on ill-reasoned federal cases because it considers them to be “more consistent with the remedial purpose of the statute.” This, I regretfully suggest, begs the question of what the Nebraska Legislature sought to remedy.

The express purpose of our act is to “foster the employment of all employable persons ... on the basis of merit regardless of their race, color, religion, sex, disability, or national…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Susan Rae Baker v. Stuart Broadcasting CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1977
  2. State Ex Rel. Grape v. ZachNebraska Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Seevers v. PotterNebraska Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Nebraska Life & Health Insurance Guaranty Ass'n v. DobiasNebraska Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Major Liquors, Inc. v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1972

1 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