James R. Zeleny, appellant,
State of Nebraska, appellee.
Judgments: Appeal and Error. Generally, the appropriate
standard of review for an order granting relief by way of a
writ of prohibition is de novo.
Jurisdiction: Final Orders: Appeal and Error. An appellate
court has jurisdiction to review a judgment rendered or final
order made by the district court.
Judgments: Final Orders: Words and Phrases. According to Neb.
Rev. Stat. § 25-1301(1) (Reissue 2016), a judgment is
the final determination of the rights of the parties in an
Actions: Jurisdiction. A motion for a writ of prohibition is
Judgments: Final Orders: Jurisdiction: Appeal and Error. An
appellate court's jurisdiction is limited to the judgment
or final order from which the appeal is taken.
Final Orders: Jurisdiction: Appeal and Error. An appeal from
a final order may raise, on appeal, every issue presented by
the order that is the subject of the appeal. But that
jurisdiction does not extend to issues that are not presented
by the final order, because an appellate court's
jurisdiction to grant relief pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat.
§ 25-1911 (Reissue 2016) is limited to reversal,
vacation, or modification of the final order from which the
appeal is taken.
Jurisdiction: Words and Phrases. In modern practice, the writ
of prohibition is an extraordinary writ, issued by a superior
court to an inferior judicial tribunal to prevent the latter
from exceeding its jurisdiction, either by prohibiting it
from assuming jurisdiction in a matter over which it has
control, or from exceeding its legitimate powers in a matter
of which is has jurisdiction.
__:__. Prohibition is a preventative remedy rather than a
Neb. 245] 9. Jurisdiction. Mere error, irregularity, or
mistake in the proceedings of a court having jurisdiction
does not justify a resort to the extraordinary remedy by
prohibition, both because there has been no usurpation or
abuse of power and because there exist other adequate
In general, three things are necessary to justify the
issuance of a writ of prohibition: (1) that the court,
officer, or person against whom it is directed is about to
exercise judicial or quasi-judicial power; (2) that the
exercise of such power by such court, officer, or person is
unauthorized by law; and (3) that it will result in injury
for which there is no other adequate remedy.
from the District Court for Fillmore County: Ricky A.
Schreiner, Judge. Affirmed.
J. Wythers, of Berry Law Firm, for appellant.
Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and Austin N. Relph
Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Kelch, and
R. Zeleny's petition for a writ of prohibition was