Edwards v. Douglas County
308 Neb. 259
Neb.2021Background
- On Feb. 12, 2016, Kenneth Clark shot Julie Edwards’ brothers, then held Edwards hostage and sexually assaulted her; her brother John called Douglas County 911 multiple times between ~10:12 and 10:33 a.m.
- Law enforcement was dispatched at ~10:54 a.m. and arrived ~10:58 a.m.; Edwards alleges the 911 center’s mishandling of calls delayed response and allowed the assault to continue.
- Edwards filed a negligence tort claim under the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act (PSTCA), after giving presuit notice, alleging Douglas County breached its duty in operating 911 services.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Douglas County, concluding no legal duty existed; Edwards appealed.
- On appeal the Nebraska Supreme Court addressed, as a threshold jurisdictional matter, whether the PSTCA’s §13-910(7) exemption for “[a]ny claim arising out of assault” bars Edwards’ negligence claim and whether Neb. Rev. Stat. §86-441 (ETCSA) separately waives sovereign immunity for 911 providers.
- The court affirmed dismissal, holding the PSTCA intentional-tort exemption bars Edwards’ claim and that §86-441 does not effect a waiver of sovereign immunity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether PSTCA §13-910(7) (any claim "arising out of assault") bars Edwards’ negligence claim based on alleged mishandling of 911 calls | Edwards: her claim is independent negligence (delay in emergency response), not an assault-based claim | County: Edwards’ damages flow from Clark’s assault; claim "arises out of assault" and is exempt from PSTCA waiver | Court: Applied strict-construction precedent (including Moser). Held the negligence claim is "inextricably linked" to the assault and is barred by §13-910(7); dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction |
| Whether Neb. Rev. Stat. §86-441 (ETCSA) constitutes a separate waiver of sovereign immunity for 911 service providers | Edwards: §86-441 should be read to waive immunity for negligence in contracting/providing 911 services | County: PSTCA is the exclusive waiver scheme; §86-441 does not expressly waive sovereign immunity | Court: PSTCA is the exclusive tort-waiver scheme for political subdivisions and §86-441 contains no express waiver; §86-441 does not waive sovereign immunity |
Key Cases Cited
- Moser v. State, 307 Neb. 18, 948 N.W.2d 194 (Neb. 2020) (applied §13-910/§81-8,219 exemption broadly; overruled Doe)
- Rutledge v. City of Kimball, 304 Neb. 593, 935 N.W.2d 746 (Neb. 2019) (intentional-tort exemption bars negligence claims "inextricably linked" to assault)
- Johnson v. State, 270 Neb. 316, 700 N.W.2d 620 (Neb. 2005) (assault-exemption bars negligent supervision/hiring claims tied to an assault)
- Britton v. City of Crawford, 282 Neb. 374, 803 N.W.2d 508 (Neb. 2011) (exemption covers claims that "sound in negligence but stem from" an assault)
- Doe v. Omaha Pub. Sch. Dist., 273 Neb. 79, 727 N.W.2d 447 (Neb. 2007) (earlier, narrower reading allowing some independent negligence claims; later described as an outlier)
- Sheridan v. United States, 487 U.S. 392 (U.S. 1988) (U.S. Sup. Ct. discussion of FTCA exception; majority/dissent reasoning used as comparative authority)