Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Mutual of Omaha Bank v. Watson

Supreme Court of Nebraska

December 7, 2018

Mutual of Omaha Bank, appellee,
v.
Robert W. Watson, APPELLANT, AND Shona Rae Watson, appellee, Formerly husband and wife, and Community Bank of Lincoln, Trustee and beneficiary, et al., appellees.

         1. Judgments: Jurisdiction: Appeal and Error. A jurisdictional issue that does not involve a factual dispute presents a question of law, which an appellate court independently decides.

         2. Judgments: Words and Phrases. A judgment is the final determination of the rights of the parties in an action.

         3. Final Orders: Appeal and Error. Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1902 (Reissue 2016), the three types of final orders which may be reviewed on appeal are (1) an order which affects a substantial right and which determines the action and prevents a judgment, (2) an order affecting a substantial right made during a special proceeding, and (3) an order affecting a substantial right made on summary application in an action after judgment is rendered.

         4. Final Orders: Words and Phrases. A substantial right is an essential legal right.

          Appeal from the District Court for Lancaster County: John A. Colborn, Judge.

          Robert Watson, pro se.

          Eric H. Lindquist, PC, L.L.O., for appellee Mutual of Omaha Bank.

         [301 Neb. 834] Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, Papik, and Freudenberg, JJ.

          PAPIK, J.

         Robert W. Watson appeals from an order of the district court denying his request for a stay of an order of sale in a judicial foreclosure action. Watson claims he was entitled to such a stay under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1506 (Reissue 2016). We conclude that the order denying the request for a stay was not appealable and therefore dismiss the appeal.

         BACKGROUND

         This is not the first time this matter has come before this court. After the district court determined that Watson and his former spouse owed Mutual of Omaha Bank (Mutual) $533, 459.36, ordered an execution sale, and foreclosed Watson and his former spouse from asserting any interest in the relevant property, Watson perfected a timely appeal. We affirmed. See Mutual of Omaha Bank v. Watson, 297 Neb. 479, 900 N.W.2d 545 (2017).

         After our opinion was issued, Mutual applied to the district court for and received a supplemental decree. In the supplemental decree, the court stated that Mutual paid sums connected to the mortgaged property that were not included in the initial decree and ordered that those amounts be added to the amount due Mutual. Watson requested a stay of the order of sale. The ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.