Legal Opinion

McVaney v. BAIRD, HOLM, McEACHEN

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided March 8, 1991No. 88-881PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFahrnbruch, J.

John J. McVaney appeals a directed verdict adverse to him in an attorney malpractice action in which he alleged inter alia that the defendant law firm failed to timely file a negligence action against the Metropolitan Utilities District (MUD).

In directing a verdict at the close of the plaintiff’s case in chief for the defendant law firm, Baird, Holm, McEachen, Pedersen, Hamann & Strasheim (Baird), the district court for Douglas County found as a matter of law that McVaney failed to adduce sufficient evidence from which a jury could find that negligence on the part of MUD was the proximate…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Kurtenbach v. TeKippeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1977
  2. George v. CatonNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1979
  3. Driekosen v. Black, Sivalls & Bryson, Inc.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1954
  4. McCune v. NeitzelNebraska Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Canas v. Maryland Casualty Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1990

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Chem-Age Industries, Inc. v. GloverSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Keegan v. First Bank of Sioux FallsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Richardson v. GriffithsNebraska Supreme Court · 1997
  4. McWhirt v. HeaveyNebraska Supreme Court · 1996
  5. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. Touche Ross & Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1993

33 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