Dick v. Koski Prof. Group - supplemental opinion , 308 Neb. 257 ( 2021 )


Menu:
  • Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library
    www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/
    04/29/2021 08:09 AM CDT
    - 257 -
    Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
    308 Nebraska Reports
    DICK v. KOSKI PROF. GROUP
    Cite as 
    308 Neb. 257
    Robert Dick, appellee and cross-appellant, v. Koski
    Professional Group, P.C., third-party plaintiff,
    appellant and cross-appellee, and Bland &
    Associates, P.C., third-party defendant,
    appellee and cross-appellant.
    ___ N.W.2d ___
    Filed January 29, 2021.   No. S-19-132.
    supplemental opinion
    Appeal from the District Court for Douglas County: J
    Russell Derr, Judge. Former opinion modified. Motion for
    rehearing overruled.
    Robert M. Slovek and Dwyer Arce, of Kutak Rock, L.L.P.,
    for appellant.
    Aaron A. Clark, Ruth A. Horvatich, and Cody E.
    Brookhouser-Sisney, of McGrath, North, Mullin & Kratz, P.C.,
    L.L.O., for appellee Robert Dick.
    Ryan M. Kunhart and Jeffrey J. Blumel, of Dvorak Law
    Group, L.L.C., for appellee Bland & Associates, P.C.
    Heavican, C.J., Cassel, Stacy, Funke, Papik, and
    Freudenberg, JJ.
    Per Curiam.
    This case is before us on a motion for rehearing filed
    by the appellant, Koski Professional Group, P.C. (KPG),
    - 258 -
    Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
    308 Nebraska Reports
    DICK v. KOSKI PROF. GROUP
    Cite as 
    308 Neb. 257
    concerning our opinion in Dick v. Koski Prof. Group, 
    307 Neb. 599
    , 
    950 N.W.2d 321
     (2020).
    We find no substantive merit to KPG’s motion and overrule
    it, but modify the opinion as follows:
    (1) In the background section, under the subheading
    “Peremptory Challenges,” we withdraw the last sentence of
    the sole paragraph and substitute the following: “Other than a
    marked copy of a jury roster included in a supplemental tran-
    script, the jury selection process is not otherwise reflected in
    the appellate record.”
    (2) In the analysis section, under the subheading “Peremptory
    Challenges (Assignment of Error No. 1),” we withdraw the
    seventh paragraph and substitute the following:
    We do not decide that question here. While KPG has
    offered a marked copy of a jury roster in a supplemental
    transcript, the markings on that roster do not match the
    roster’s legend sufficiently to support KPG’s claim that
    it exhausted all its peremptory challenges. As such, the
    record is insufficient to support its assignment of error
    even if we found merit to KPG’s legal premise.
    The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified.
    Former opinion modified.
    Motion for rehearing overruled.
    Miller-Lerman, J., not participating.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: S-19-132

Citation Numbers: 308 Neb. 257

Filed Date: 1/29/2021

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 4/29/2021