Fales v. County of Stanton
297 Neb. 41
| Neb. | 2017Background
- At ~12:45 a.m. two minors, Irish (driver) and Fales (passenger), left a party after consuming alcohol; they took back roads when they learned law enforcement was nearby.
- Stanton County Deputy Petersen followed Irish’s pickup and activated emergency lights to effect a traffic stop for a turn-signal violation and possible speeding.
- After Irish accelerated, Fales threw a 30-pack beer box and cans out the passenger window; Petersen observed beer on the roadway and reported over radio that beer was being thrown.
- The pickup later lost control on a curve, struck a culvert, and Fales sustained severe injuries and 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; the County counterclaimed asserting constitutional and sovereign immunity defenses.
- The district court found Fales lost innocent-third-party status when he discarded the beer (broadening the officer’s focus of apprehension) and entered judgment for the County; the Supreme Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Fales was an "innocent third party" under § 13-911 | Fales argued he remained an innocent third party because the pursuit began for a traffic violation and he was not the initial target | County argued that by discarding beer (destruction of evidence) during the pursuit, Fales became a person sought to be apprehended and thus not an innocent third party | Court held Fales was not an innocent third party because his observed act of throwing beer broadened the officer’s purpose to apprehend occupants who might destroy evidence |
| Whether a passenger who commits a crime during a pursuit remains protected by § 13-911 | Fales contended criminal acts during pursuit do not automatically convert passenger into a person sought to be apprehended | County contended affirmative criminal conduct observed during pursuit removes innocent-third-party protection | Court held a passenger can lose innocent-third-party status if during the pursuit they take action making them a person sought to be apprehended (here, throwing beer) |
| Whether factual findings that officer’s apprehension broadened were clearly erroneous | Fales argued Petersen did not see who threw beer and his testimony was hypothetical, so findings were unsupported | County relied on Petersen’s real-time radio reports and testimony about observing beer being thrown and treating that as destruction of evidence | Court held district court’s factual findings were not clearly erroneous and reasonable inferences supported them |
| Whether constitutional challenge to § 13-911 must be reached given judgment for County | Fales did not press constitutional challenge; County cross-appealed seeking to invalidate statute | County asked court to consider statute’s constitutionality | Court declined to address cross-appeal because resolution for County made constitutional question unnecessary |
Key Cases Cited
- Werner v. County of Platte, 284 Neb. 899, 824 N.W.2d 38 (2012) (passenger remained innocent third party where officer did not know passenger was committing unrelated crime during pursuit)
- Henery v. City of Omaha, 263 Neb. 700, 641 N.W.2d 644 (2002) (Legislature intended innocent-third-party inquiry to focus on third party’s actions in relation to flight)
- Jura v. City of Omaha, 15 Neb. App. 390, 727 N.W.2d 735 (2007) (passenger in stolen vehicle was a person sought to be apprehended; officers may seek all occupants when facts justify it)
- Williams v. City of Omaha, 291 Neb. 403, 865 N.W.2d 779 (2015) (standards for reviewing factual findings and statutory interpretation under Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act)
- Adair Asset Mgmt. v. Terry's Legacy, 293 Neb. 32, 875 N.W.2d 421 (2016) (appellate courts need not decide constitutional issues unnecessary to disposition)