Fales v. County of Stanton
297 Neb. 41
Neb.2017Background
- Around 12:45 a.m., two underage males, Irish (driver) and Fales (passenger), left a party after consuming beer; a Stanton County deputy (Petersen) began following them for traffic concerns.
- When Petersen activated emergency lights, the driver accelerated; Fales tossed a 30‑pack/beer cans from the passenger window during the drive.
- Petersen observed beer on the road and radioed that beer was being thrown; he considered the act destruction of evidence and broadened his apprehension to occupants.
- The pickup crashed on a curve; Fales suffered severe injuries and sued the County under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 13‑911, claiming status as an "innocent third party."
- The district court found Fales lost innocent‑third‑party status when he discarded beer during the pursuit and entered judgment for the County; Fales appealed and the County cross‑appealed on constitutionality grounds.
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 pursuit began for a traffic violation and deputies did not specifically seek him | County argued Fales became a person sought to be apprehended when he threw beer (destruction of evidence) observed by deputy | Court held Fales lost innocent‑third‑party status when he discarded beer during the pursuit and thus § 13‑911 did not apply |
| Whether a passenger who commits an offense during a pursuit retains innocent status | Fales: committing a crime during pursuit does not automatically make a passenger subject of pursuit | County: passenger’s act (destroying evidence) can broaden officer’s intent to apprehend occupants | Court held a passenger can lose innocent status during a pursuit if his conduct makes him a person sought to be apprehended |
| Sufficiency of district court’s factual findings about deputy’s broadened intent | Fales: findings lacked factual basis (deputy didn’t see who threw beer) | County: radio traffic and deputy testimony support inference that occupants were discarding beer and the deputy sought all occupants | Court held district court’s factual findings were not clearly erroneous and must be viewed in favor of the successful party |
| Need to address County’s constitutional challenge to § 13‑911 | Fales: irrelevant if he is not an innocent third party | County: challenged statute as unconstitutional in cross‑appeal | Court declined to reach cross‑appeal because resolution for Fales rendered it unnecessary |
Key Cases Cited
- Werner v. County of Platte, 284 Neb. 899, 824 N.W.2d 38 (2012) (defines "innocent third party" and affirms deference to trial court factual findings)
- Henery v. City of Omaha, 263 Neb. 700, 641 N.W.2d 644 (2002) (legislative intent: focus on third party conduct relative 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)
- Williams v. City of Omaha, 291 Neb. 403, 865 N.W.2d 779 (2015) (standards for appellate review of factual findings under Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act)