Fales v. County of Stanton
297 Neb. 41
| Neb. | 2017Background
- Shortly after midnight, two minors (Irish driving, Fales passenger) left a party; a Stanton County deputy followed for traffic concerns after observing unsafe turns and then activated lights.
- As the pickup accelerated, Fales tossed a 30‑pack/beer cans from the vehicle; the deputy observed beer on the roadway and radioed that beer was being thrown out.
- The pickup later left the roadway, struck a culvert, and Fales suffered catastrophic injuries (paralysis).
- Fales sued the County under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 13‑911 claiming he was an "innocent third party" injured by a law enforcement vehicular pursuit; he also alleged a negligence claim under § 60‑6,114.
- The County counterclaimed, challenging the constitutionality of § 13‑911 and asserting sovereign immunity; the district court found Fales was not an innocent third party and entered judgment for the County.
- On appeal, the Nebraska Supreme Court reviewed de novo legal issues but deferred to the trial court’s factual findings unless clearly erroneous, and affirmed the judgment based on Fales losing innocent‑third‑party status when he discarded the beer.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Fales an "innocent third party" under § 13‑911? | Fales argued he remained an innocent third party because the pursuit began for a traffic violation and the officer did not target him. | County argued Fales lost innocent status by actively discarding evidence during the pursuit, making him a person sought to be apprehended. | Court held Fales lost innocent‑third‑party status when he threw beer observed by the deputy; thus § 13‑911 did not apply. |
| Did law enforcement seek to apprehend the passenger(s) as opposed to only the driver? | Fales argued the deputy intended to stop only the driver for traffic violations. | County argued the deputy reasonably broadened his apprehension to all occupants after seeing evidence being jettisoned. | Court held that an officer’s purpose can broaden during a pursuit and inferred the deputy sought to apprehend occupants when evidence was thrown. |
| Is the trial court’s factual finding that the deputy observed evidence being thrown clearly erroneous? | Fales argued there was no factual basis that beer came from the pickup or that the deputy saw who threw it. | County relied on radio traffic and deputy testimony that beer was being thrown from the vehicle. | Court held the district court’s factual findings were not clearly erroneous given deposition, trial testimony, and radio logs. |
| Should the Court address County’s constitutional challenge to § 13‑911? | N/A (County raised it on cross‑appeal). | County asked to declare § 13‑911 unconstitutional. | Court declined to reach the constitutional issue as unnecessary because Fales failed the threshold innocent‑third‑party requirement. |
Key Cases Cited
- Werner v. County of Platte, 284 Neb. 899, 824 N.W.2d 38 (2012) (defines "innocent third party" and analyzes passenger status when officer sought only driver)
- Williams v. City of Omaha, 291 Neb. 403, 865 N.W.2d 779 (2015) (standards for appellate review in Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act cases)
- Henery v. City of Omaha, 263 Neb. 700, 641 N.W.2d 644 (2002) (legislative intent regarding third‑party actions related to flight)
- Jura v. City of Omaha, 15 Neb. App. 390, 727 N.W.2d 735 (2007) (passenger in stolen vehicle held to be a person sought to be apprehended)
- Adair Asset Mgmt. v. Terry’s Legacy, 293 Neb. 32, 875 N.W.2d 421 (2016) (appellate courts need not decide unnecessary issues)