Fales v. County of Stanton, 297 Neb. 41

Background

Late-night after a party, driver Bryant Irish (minor) drove a pickup with passenger Dillon Fales (minor); sheriff deputy Michael Petersen began following after observing unsafe maneuvers.
Deputy activated emergency lights for a traffic stop; Irish accelerated when followed. While fleeing, beer (including a 30-pack) was tossed from the pickup; radio traffic and Petersen confirmed beer was being thrown.
Petersen viewed the beer jettisoning as destruction of evidence and considered the occupants as potential subjects of apprehension, though he did not identify which occupant threw the beer.
The pickup later lost control on a curve, struck a culvert, and Fales suffered catastrophic injuries (paralysis).
Fales sued Stanton County under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 13-911 claiming he was an "innocent third party" injured by a law enforcement vehicular pursuit; County counterclaimed challenging the statute’s constitutionality and asserted sovereign immunity.
The district court found Fales ceased to be an innocent third party when he threw beer from the vehicle (as observed by Petersen) and entered judgment for the County; Fales appealed.

Issues

Issue	Fales' Argument	County's Argument	Held
Whether Fales was an "innocent third party" under § 13-911	Fales argued he was an innocent third party because the pursuit began for a traffic violation and he was not the target; mere criminality by a passenger does not automatically change status	County argued Fales became a person sought to be apprehended when he threw beer (destruction of evidence) during the pursuit, so § 13-911 does not apply	Court held Fales lost innocent-third-party status when he tossed beer observed by the deputy, so County not liable under § 13-911
Whether factual findings that deputy broadened intent to apprehend occupants were clearly erroneous	Fales argued the court relied on hypotheticals and lacked proof the beer came from inside the pickup or was thrown by him	County relied on radio traffic, deputy testimony, and logical inferences that the deputy’s apprehension broadened to occupants who jettisoned evidence	Court held district court’s factual findings were not clearly erroneous and inferences were reasonable
Whether prior cases (Werner, Jura) require a different result	Fales relied on Werner to argue contemporaneous criminal acts by a passenger don’t automatically make them a target; cited Jura for limits	County argued circumstances here (observed evidence destruction during pursuit) distinguish Werner and support treating passenger as sought	Court distinguished Werner (officer unaware of passenger’s crime during pursuit) and found case facts closer to Jura; ruled against Fales
Need to resolve County’s constitutional cross-appeal about § 13-911	Fales argued statute applies; County raised constitutional challenges to the statute	County sought declaratory relief that § 13-911 unconstitutional or preempted by negligence standard; after judgment for County on merits, County conceded cross-appeal need not be reached	Court declined to address constitutionality because disposition on innocent-third-party issue made it unnecessary

Key Cases Cited

Werner v. County of Platte, 284 Neb. 899, 824 N.W.2d 38 (passenger remained innocent third party where officer did not know passenger was committing separate crime during pursuit)
Henery v. City of Omaha, 263 Neb. 700, 641 N.W.2d 644 (legislative intent re: innocent third party and relation to driver’s flight)
Jura v. City of Omaha, 15 Neb. App. 390, 727 N.W.2d 735 (passenger in stolen vehicle was a person sought to be apprehended)
Williams v. City of Omaha, 291 Neb. 403, 865 N.W.2d 779 (standard of review and evidentiary view in Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act cases)