Jacobson v. Shresta

Summary

The Nebraska Supreme Court held that a party in district court does not waive the constitutional right to a jury trial merely by failing to object before a court grants a motion for a bifurcated bench trial. The court nevertheless concluded that the plaintiffs had no right to a jury determination of whether the defendant physicians were employees of a political subdivision for purposes of the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act. The court affirmed the Nebraska Court of Appeals’ judgment.

Holdings

1. A district-court party waives the constitutional right to a jury trial only when the court determines that one of the three waiver circumstances specified in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1126 applies. Mere failure to object before a defendant's request for a bench trial on a bifurcated issue is not, by itself, a statutory waiver.
2. A party is not entitled to a jury trial on whether a defendant is an employee of a political subdivision because a jury trial is not one of the terms by which the Legislature waived governmental immunity under the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a party in district court waives the constitutional right to a jury trial merely by failing to object before the court grants a motion for a bifurcated bench trial.
2. Whether the plaintiffs were entitled to a jury trial on the issue of whether the defendants were employees of a political subdivision for purposes of governmental immunity under the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act.

Disposition

affirmed