Latest News

11 Apr, 2013

Werner v. Platte County (Part II): Don’t Get Too Excited About the Excited Utterance Hearsay Exception

2018-04-23T20:50:32-06:00April 11th, 2013|Appellate Work, Cross Examination, Direct/Redirect Examination, Discovery, Litigation Tips, Nebraska Litigation & Trial Advisor, Trial, Witness Preparation|

   LDM Partner Cathy Trent-Vilim continues her discussion of her recent case in this post. You read in Part I of Werner v. Platte County how the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s ruling that statements by Mr. Werner made to the EMT while at the scene of the accident qualified for the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule.  The purpose of this post is to discuss why [...]

9 Apr, 2013

Werner v. Platte County (Part I): Get Excited About the Excited Utterance Hearsay Exception

2018-04-23T20:50:32-06:00April 9th, 2013|Appellate Work, Direct/Redirect Examination, Discovery, Litigation Tips, Nebraska Litigation & Trial Advisor, Trial, Witness Preparation|

LDM attorneys Cathy Trent-Vilim and Bill Lamson recently received a decision from the Nebraska Supreme Court affirming the maximum $1 million judgment obtained on behalf of Brian Werner in a suit against Platte County, Nebraska, arising from injuries Mr. Werner suffered while a passenger in a vehicle being pursued by a Platte County deputy. LDM Partner Cathy Trent-Vilim  discusses her recent case in this post. In appealing the judgment, Platte County [...]

29 May, 2012

Cyber Gripe – “Anonymous” Comments Could Cost You Millions

2018-04-24T00:12:17-06:00May 29th, 2012|Discovery, In-House Counsel, Nebraska Litigation & Trial Advisor|

Two weeks ago, I noted the Internet has become an area where individuals with access to the Internet can effect peoples' lives and businesses.  Just about every website, blog and Internet forum provides individuals with the opportunity to comment on anything subject matter.  The comments are also often made under the guise of an "anonymous" username which provides little to no personal information about the commenters.  Be careful, your comments might [...]

24 May, 2012

Dangers of Email in Discovery

2018-04-24T00:08:56-06:00May 24th, 2012|Discovery, Nebraska Litigation & Trial Advisor|

I recently read a couple of articles which seemed to be written for each other.  The first article recounted the downward spiral of a discovery issue between two attorneys.  The issue had to do with simply scheduling depositions.  Without giving a blow by blow (almost literally) it is enough to say that one lawyer clearly was having a bad evening and did not appreciate that other’s requests for deposition dates.  If [...]

17 Jan, 2012

As A Trial Lawyer, Form Can Trump Substance

2018-04-24T00:12:18-06:00January 17th, 2012|Cross Examination, Depositions, Direct/Redirect Examination, Discovery, Nebraska Litigation & Trial Advisor, Trial|

 As trial lawyers, events often move quickly and we make sure the substance of a particular position is made in order to protect the interests of our clients.  Unfortunately, substance doesn't always win the day and there are times when form is extremely important.  An example of this is the Nebraska Supreme Court's opinion in State v. Ford, 279 Neb. 453, 778 N.W.2d 473 (2010).  During the course of this criminal trial, the [...]

20 Dec, 2011

Three Thoughts on Answering Over (and Potentially Waiving) Objections to Interrogatories in Nebraska

2018-04-24T00:12:18-06:00December 20th, 2011|Discovery, In-House Counsel, Nebraska Litigation & Trial Advisor|

A pitfall in handling interrogatories in Nebraska's state courts is waiving an objection by answering over it.  While Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 33 specifically addresses the issue by providing "[e]ach interrogatory must, to the extent it is not objected to, be answered separately and fully in writing under oath" in FRCP 33(b)(3) and "[t]he grounds for objecting to an interrogatory must be stated with specificity. Any ground not stated in a timely objection is waived unless [...]

13 Dec, 2011

Tymar v. Two Men and A Truck – Three Keys To Dealing with Requests for Admission

2018-04-24T00:12:19-06:00December 13th, 2011|Discovery, Nebraska Litigation & Trial Advisor, Trial|

One of the most dangerous discovery vehicles is requests for admission, or § 6-336 of the Nebraska Rules of Discovery.  In Tymar v. Two Men and A Truck, 282 Neb. 692, __ N.W.2d __ (2011), the Nebraska Supreme Court provided a reminder of the dangers of failing to properly address requests for admission.   As a quick refresher, a party must timely respond to requests for admission as provided in the pertinent portion of § 6-336(a) to avoid having the requests be [...]