Soto v. State

699 N.W.2d 819, 270 Neb. 40, 2005 Neb. LEXIS 118
Nebraska Supreme Court·Decided June 24, 2005·No. S-04-569·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This matter is before the court on the motion for rehearing of the appellee, State of Nebraska, Department of Roads, regarding our opinion reported at Soto v. State, 269 Neb. 337, 693 N.W.2d 491 (2005). We overrule the motion, but modify the opinion as follows:

In the second to last paragraph of the opinion, id. at 346, 693 N.W.2d at 499, the last two sentences of that paragraph are withdrawn, and the following is substituted in their place:

In order to harmonize §§ 48-199, 48-1,102, and 48-125 in the context of waiting-time penalties in a manner which is consistent with the overall purpose of the act, we hold that *41 in order to avoid assessment of a waiting-time penalty with respect to that portion of a workers’ compensation award against the State which exceeds $50,000, the State must request review and appropriation of such amount during the first legislative session following the date the award became final and must pay such amount within 30 calendar days after the approval of the appropriation by the Legislature.

The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified.

Former opinion modified.

Motion for rehearing overruled.

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

Soto v. State, 699 N.W.2d 819, 270 Neb. 40, 2005 Neb. LEXIS 118 (Neb. 2005).

699 N.W.2d 819 (Soto v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Holdsworth v. Greenwood Famers Co-op
835 N.W.2d 30 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2013)
Herrington v. PR VENTURES, LLC
781 N.W.2d 196 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2010)
Stacy v. GREAT LAKES AGRI MARKETING, INC.
753 N.W.2d 785 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2008)
Davis v. Crete Carrier Corp.
725 N.W.2d 562 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 2006)
LECOUNA v. Cramer
714 N.W.2d 786 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 2006)
McKenzie v. City of Omaha
708 N.W.2d 286 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 2006)