City of Lincoln v. County of Lancaster, 898 N.W.2d 374

A Lancaster County deputy intentionally made physical contact with a Lincoln police officer; the officer’s preexisting shoulder surgery was aggravated and the City paid ~$63,418 in workers’ compensation for the injury.
The County had a retained-limits liability policy: $250,000 retained limit per occurrence and $4,750,000 policy limit; insurer indemnified damages and claim expenses only in excess of the retained limit.
The City sued the County to recover the workers’ compensation payments, asserting the County waived sovereign immunity by purchasing liability insurance under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 13-916.
The County moved for summary judgment arguing (1) the claim arose from an intentional tort (battery) exempting it from the Act’s waiver, and (2) the policy’s retained limit meant no waiver for this under-limit claim.
The district court concluded the claim arose from a battery (intentional tort) and that the County’s insurance purchase did not waive immunity for claims under the $250,000 retained limit, and granted summary judgment for the County.
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, but on different grounds: because the policy covered only accidental “occurrences,” an intentional battery was not covered, so no insurance coverage existed to trigger any waiver of sovereign immunity.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the officer’s injury claim arises from a battery (intentional tort)	The City did not contest characterization below; later argued it was not battery	County: the touching was intentional and therefore a battery exempting the claim from the Act	Court: the contact was intentional; claim arises from battery, so falls within intentional-torts exception
Whether purchasing liability insurance under § 13-916 waived County’s sovereign immunity	City: County’s purchase of liability insurance waived immunity for this claim	County: policy covers only occurrences (accidents); battery is excluded, so no coverage and no waiver	Court: policy’s insuring agreement required an "occurrence" (accidental happening); battery is intentional and not an occurrence; no coverage, thus no waiver
Whether retained limit affects waiver for under-limit claim	City: waiver should apply regardless of retained limit if insurer/ policy purchased	County: policy expressly indemnifies only amounts in excess of $250,000 retained limit, so no insurer obligation for this $63k claim	Court: did not need to decide retained-limit issue because there was no coverage for intentional battery; declined to make a blanket rule on retained limits

Kimminau v. City of Hastings, 291 Neb. 133 (discussing intentional-torts exemption under the Tort Claims Act)
Drake-Williams Steel v. Continental Cas. Co., 294 Neb. 386 (insurance policy interpretation; coverage scope)
Britton v. City of Crawford, 282 Neb. 374 (battery as intentional tort; not an accident)
Austin v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 261 Neb. 697 (intentional acts are not accidents; coverage principles)