McCombs v. Prenosil

Nebraska Supreme Court

McCombs v. Prenosil

415 N.W.2d 453, 226 Neb. 839, 1987 Neb. LEXIS 1078

Nebraska Supreme Court·Decided November 20, 1987·No. Nos. 85-721, 85-1014·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The appellant’s brief in these cases contains no assignments of error. Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1919 (Reissue 1985) and the rules of this court, Neb. Ct. R. of Prac. 9D(l)d (rev. 1986), require that each error assigned shall be separately stated in an appellant’s brief. In the absence of an assignment of error, the judgment will be affirmed, unless the court notes plain error on the record. Baggett v. City of Omaha, 220 Neb. 805, 373 N.W.2d 391 (1985).

Since the records in these cases fail to disclose plain error, the judgments are affirmed.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The appellant’s brief in these cases contains no assignments of error. Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1919 (Reissue 1985) and the rules of this court, Neb. Ct. R. of Prac. 9D(l)d (rev. 1986), require that each error assigned shall be separately stated in an appellant’s brief. In the absence of an assignment of error, the judgment will be affirmed, unless the court notes plain error on the record. Baggett v. City of Omaha, 220 Neb. 805, 373 N.W.2d 391 (1985).

Since the records in these cases fail to disclose plain error, the judgments are affirmed.

Affirmed.

McCombs v. Prenosil, 415 N.W.2d 453, 226 Neb. 839, 1987 Neb. LEXIS 1078 (Neb. 1987).

Pincite

415 N.W.2d 453 (McCombs v. Prenosil) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related