Parks v. Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.

Summary

The Nebraska Supreme Court considered whether an investor’s claim against a securities broker was governed by the statute of limitations for professional negligence rather than the limitations period for breach of oral contract. The court held that the broker was not a professional under Nebraska’s statutory definition because his licensing and training did not require the type of extensive preparation associated with a profession. The court also held that the defendant’s alternative statute-of-limitations arguments were not preserved for appellate review and affirmed.

Holdings

1. Kenton was not a professional within the meaning of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-222; therefore, the professional-negligence statute of limitations did not apply to Parks' claim.
2. Merrill Lynch failed to preserve its arguments under the ordinary-negligence and breach-of-oral-contract statutes of limitations because it did not assert those grounds in its directed-verdict motions made at the close of Parks' evidence and renewed at the close of all evidence.
3. The appeal was properly before the court because Nebraska statutes authorize an appeal from denial of judgment notwithstanding the verdict after a jury has been discharged for inability to reach a verdict.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Parks' claim was one for professional negligence rather than breach of contract, such that Nebraska's professional-negligence statute of limitations applied.
2. Whether Merrill Lynch preserved its arguments that Parks' claim was barred by the statutes of limitations for ordinary negligence or breach of oral contract.
3. Whether the appeal from denial of judgment notwithstanding the verdict was properly before the court after the jury was discharged because it could not reach a verdict.

Disposition

affirmed