We’re very pleased we were able to reach these two positive outcomes for our clients
Lincoln, NE (PRWEB) August 17, 2015
The law firm of Perry, Guthery, Haase & Gessford, P.C., L.L.O., recently represented clients in two cases decided by the Nebraska Supreme Court, both dealing with issues of statutory interpretation.
The first case (Credit Management Services, Inc. v. Jefferson, case number S-14-545, Nebraska Supreme Court) involved an account recovery company that, after an unsuccessful attempt to recover a debt, filed a lawsuit against the debtor. According to court documents, after that person made a voluntary payment before judgment in the case, the company then wished to recover the cost incurred by filing the original lawsuit. The county and district courts had ruled that this was contrary to state statutes.
“The lower courts’ rationale had a much broader implication than just this one situation; the lower courts’ rationale would have made it almost impossible for a plaintiff to recover court costs incurred in having to file a lawsuit to collect what was owed to a plaintiff by the defendant,” John Guthery, a member of the firm, explained.
Therefore, although the firm’s client realized that the expense of taking an appeal up to the state’s highest court wasn't justified from a purely financial perspective, the company decided to pursue an appeal of the lower courts' decisions.
According to court documents, the Nebraska Supreme Court reversed the decisions of the lower courts, both allowing the law firm’s client to recoup their original costs and clarifying the statutes in question (25-1708 and, indirectly, 25-1801 in the Nebraska Revised Statutes) for the future.
The second case (Nebuda v. Scribner Snyder Community Schools, case number S-14-477, Nebraska Supreme Court) addressed a situation in which taxpayers had sued their local school district over a lease-purchase agreement between the district and a local bank. Court records state that the agreement stipulated that the bank would build on a parcel of land owned by the school district and leased to the bank, and then the bank would lease the building back to the school until it was paid off, at which time the title would be transferred to the school.
The taxpayers, according to court documents, alleged that the district had violated 75-10,105 in the Nebraska Revised Statutes, which states that “No school district shall directly or indirectly issue bonds to fund any such lease-purchase plan for a capital construction project exceeding twenty-five thousand dollars in costs unless it first obtains a favorable vote of the legal voters.”
The law firm represented the school district, arguing that the lawsuit was baseless because no bonds had been issued by anyone related to the lease-purchase agreement. The Nebraska Supreme Court, according to court records, affirmed that position, agreeing that no bond had been issued and the statute had not been violated. "The school was in a tough situation with a state fire marshal mandate and this ruling reaffirmed the viability of the lease-purchase option for school district facilities," said Derek Aldridge, an attorney at the firm.
“We’re very pleased we were able to reach these two positive outcomes for our clients,” Guthery concluded.
About Perry, Guthery, Haase & Gessford, P.C., L.L.O
Perry, Guthery, Haase & Gessford, P.C., L.L.O, has been providing legal services since 1920 to individuals, political subdivisions and businesses. The firm can assist with divorce cases, estates, probate, banking, commercial litigation, school law and more. As a small firm, Perry, Guthery, Haase & Gessford, P.C, L.L.O is able to work together with clients as a team. To learn more, visit http://www.perrylawfirm.com