City of Hastings v. Sheets, 317 Neb. 88

In 2019, the City of Hastings approved plans to demolish the "Old Highway 281 Viaduct" and later passed a resolution confirming the decision.
Citizens known as the "chief petitioners" initiated two referendum petitions aiming to reverse the council's demolition decision; the first was negated procedurally and the second sought a special election.
After securing the requisite signatures, the second petition was filed with the city clerk, but while the matter was pending, the City entered into a contract and demolished the viaduct.
The City filed a declaratory judgment action to seek a determination that it was not legally required to hold a special referendum election, arguing the matter exceeded the people's referendum power.
The chief petitioners counterclaimed seeking a declaration that their petition was proper and the election necessary under the Municipal Initiative and Referendum Act.
The District Court found the case moot since the viaduct was already demolished, and this appeal followed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Must City hold a special referendum election after viaduct's demolition?	Petitioners: Demolition is collateral; the referendum process and validity of the resolution remain live controversies.	City: Demolition renders referendum pointless; repealing the resolution would be ineffectual as the viaduct is gone.	The action is moot; demolition eliminated legal interests, so the case must be dismissed.
Does the public interest exception to mootness apply?	Petitioners: Case merits decision for future guidance to officials and public.	City: Specific facts make recurrence unlikely; no clear future guidance possible.	Exception does not apply; facts too dissimilar, not likely to recur.

Chaney v. Evnen, 307 Neb. 512 (mootness doctrine and eradication of personal interest)
NP Dodge Mgmt. Co. v. Holcomb, 314 Neb. 748 (justiciable controversy requirement for declaratory relief)
McKay v. Bartels, 316 Neb. 235 (justiciable controversy standard for declaratory judgment)
State ex rel. Peterson v. Ebke, 303 Neb. 637 (cases that are moot must be dismissed)