Summary
The Nebraska Supreme Court considered whether it had jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal from the denial of a motion to recuse a district court judge. The court held that the order was neither final nor within the collateral-order exception because the recusal issue could be adequately reviewed after a final judgment. The appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Holdings
- An order denying a motion to recuse is not a final, appealable order and does not fall within the collateral-order exception when the alleged recusal issue can be fully reviewed on appeal from a final judgment in the underlying case.
Questions Presented
- Whether the Nebraska Supreme Court had appellate jurisdiction over an interlocutory order denying a motion to recuse a district judge.
- Whether the denial of a recusal motion falls within the collateral-order exception to the final-order requirement.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (13)
- State of Florida v. Countrywide Truck Ins. Agency, 258 Neb. 113, 602 N.W.2d 432 (1999)(cited)
- Trainum v. Sutherland Assocs., 263 Neb. 778, 642 N.W.2d 816 (2002)(followed)
- Pennfield Oil Co. v. Winstrom, 267 Neb. 288, 673 N.W.2d 558 (2004)(followed)
- Richardson v. Griffiths, 251 Neb. 825, 560 N.W.2d 430 (1997)(applied)
- In re Martinez-Catala, 129 F.3d 213 (1st Cir. 1997)(persuasive)
- Nobby Lobby, Inc. v. City of Dallas, 970 F.2d 82 (5th Cir. 1992)(persuasive)
- Krieg v. Krieg, 743 A.2d 509 (Pa. Super. 1999)(persuasive)
- In re Corrugated Container Antitrust Litigation, 614 F.2d 958 (5th Cir. 1980)(persuasive)
- In re Cargill, Inc., 66 F.3d 1256 (1st Cir. 1995)(persuasive)
- State v. Forte, 150 Vt. 654, 553 A.2d 564 (1988)(persuasive)
Showing top 10 of 13.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…