Frederick v. City of Falls City, 295 Neb. 795

Plaintiff David Leon Frederick, a Richardson County resident, requested records from Falls City and EDGE in August 2012 regarding a proposed grain terminal; Falls City produced some records but EDGE refused, claiming it was not a public entity.
Frederick sued seeking a writ of mandamus to compel production; this Court earlier held EDGE was not the functional equivalent of a city agency and its records were not public under §84-712.01, reversing the district court.
In December 2015 Frederick moved under Neb. Rev. Stat. §25-2001 (or equity) to vacate/ reopen the district court case, alleging Falls City had withheld additional documents in its possession that would have allowed him to pursue Open Meetings Act violations.
A disputed meeting notice (missing from Falls City’s production but later obtained in a different case) showed inconsistent meeting times with the minutes; Frederick argued the notice would have enabled other remedies.
The district court denied Frederick’s motion to reopen; Frederick appealed the denial and assignment that EDGE should not have been dismissed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court abused discretion by denying motion to reopen	Frederick: He could not have known records were withheld and the newly discovered Falls City documents would have enabled relief (Open Meetings Act enforcement)	Falls City/EDGE: Frederick had opportunity to inspect city records earlier; the newly offered documents are not material to EDGE’s status or the prior mandamus claim	Court: No abuse of discretion; motion to reopen properly denied because new evidence was not material to the issue whether EDGE’s records were public
Whether newly discovered Falls City documents would alter prior holding on EDGE’s public-records status	Frederick: The documents (meeting notice) would show violations and affect outcome	Defendants: Documents relate to Falls City actions, not EDGE’s relationship to the city; they do not change EDGE’s private status	Court: Documents do not affect EDGE’s functional-equivalence analysis; not material

Frederick v. City of Falls City, 289 Neb. 864, 857 N.W.2d 569 (prior decision holding EDGE not a public agency)
State v. Stricklin, 290 Neb. 542, 861 N.W.2d 367 (discussing materiality standard for reopening)
Corman v. Musselman, 232 Neb. 159, 439 N.W.2d 781 (standard of review for motions to reopen)
Myhra v. Myhra, 16 Neb. App. 920, 756 N.W.2d 528 (factors for reopening a case)
Jessen v. DeFord, 3 Neb. App. 940, 536 N.W.2d 68 (factors considered when reopening to admit additional evidence)