Estate of Block v. Estate of Becker
313 Neb. 818
Neb.2023Background
- Decedent Clay Block fell ~16 feet from a second-floor apartment balcony and died; the balcony railing and its lag bolts were found on the ground next to his body.
- The balcony (used as a smoking area) had a steel railing that tenants and property manager Stephen Becker knew was loose; Becker said he would fix it but took no documented action.
- Police interviewed two witnesses who initially said Block leaned against the railing and fell; in later depositions they said they did not see the precise moment or the railing detach.
- A deputy observed rot/deterioration where the lag bolts had been secured.
- Toxicology reported a high blood-alcohol level and evidence of marijuana; defendants argued intoxication or simple loss of balance were equally plausible causes.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment on proximate-cause grounds; the trial court granted it, finding only speculation could connect the alleged railing failure to the fall. The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether plaintiffs produced sufficient evidence to create a genuine dispute of material fact on proximate cause to defeat summary judgment | Evidence (loose railing known to owner; railing and lag bolts found next to body; trajectory/inferences) allows a reasonable jury to infer Block contacted the railing, it detached, and caused the fall | Absent eyewitness testimony of the railing failing, multiple equally plausible causes (railing detachment, loss of balance, intoxication) mean any causal link is speculation and summary judgment is warranted | Reversed: circumstantial evidence here sufficed to create a genuine dispute on proximate cause; issue for jury, not summary judgment |
| Whether the trial court usurped the jury by engaging in factfinding of disputed matters | Plaintiffs contended the court improperly resolved factual disputes on summary judgment | Defendants argued the court properly concluded no competent evidence supported proximate cause | Court of Appeals: did not address this assignment; appellate decision rests on proximate-cause sufficiency (plaintiffs prevailed) |
Key Cases Cited
- Swoboda v. Mercer Mgmt. Co., 251 Neb. 347, 557 N.W.2d 629 (1997) (summary judgment appropriate where plaintiff produced no evidence allowing an inference of the alleged accident mechanics)
- Herrera v. Fleming Cos., 265 Neb. 118, 655 N.W.2d 378 (2003) (circumstantial evidence may prove causation but must fairly and reasonably justify the inference)
- Jacobs Engr. Group v. ConAgra Foods, 301 Neb. 38, 917 N.W.2d 435 (2018) (no legal distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence; reasonable inferences may be drawn)