Hike v. State, 297 Neb. 212

The Hikes owned property from which the State condemned 1.05 acres in 2008 for US Highway 75; a jury trial over valuation was later affirmed on appeal (Hike I).
In August 2011, State contractor construction near the Hikes’ house caused alleged structural damage (cracked brick veneer) estimated by experts at $51,829.
During the condemnation trial, the Hikes sought to introduce evidence of that post-taking structural damage; the district court excluded the evidence on motion in limine and this Court affirmed in Hike I, holding the damage was not the proximate result of the taking.
The Hikes did not amend their complaint to assert a separate inverse-condemnation claim at trial; instead they appealed the exclusion of the evidence.
On April 17, 2015, the Hikes filed a separate inverse-condemnation suit against the State asserting the structural damage; the State moved for summary judgment arguing the 2-year statute of limitations in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-218 barred the claim.
The district court granted summary judgment for the State; the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, holding § 25-218 governs inverse-condemnation claims against the State and the Hikes’ claim accrued in August 2011 and was filed after the 2-year period.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether judicial estoppel prevents the State from asserting a limitations defense	State previously argued the Hikes should bring structural-damage claims separately; Hikes say State cannot now argue those claims are time-barred	State says its earlier position concerned admissibility in condemnation trial and is not inconsistent with asserting a limitations defense later	No estoppel: State’s prior positions concerned admissibility; no bad-faith inconsistency shown
Which statute of limitations governs inverse-condemnation claims against the State	§ 25-202 (10-year) should apply (more analogous to land actions)	§ 25-218 (2-year) applies to claims against the State and is the more specific statute	§ 25-218 applies to inverse-condemnation suits against the State (2-year limit)
When did the Hikes’ cause of action accrue / was the claim timely	Hikes claim they preserved/raised the claim during Hike I so it was timely	State says action accrues when damage occurred (Aug 2011) and Hikes did not sue within 2 years	Court held cause accrued Aug 2011; Hikes did not bring a separate action until April 2015, so claim barred
Whether Hikes can raise a constitutional (article I, §21) argument on appeal	Hikes argue self-executing right to compensation defeats limitations issue	State and court note procedural default	Court declined to consider constitutional argument raised only in reply brief (not assigned in initial brief)

Hike v. State, 288 Neb. 60 (affirming exclusion of post-taking structural damage evidence)
Strode v. City of Ashland, 295 Neb. 44 (standard of review for summary judgment)
Krambeck v. City of Gretna, 198 Neb. 608 (10-year limitations applied to inverse-condemnation claims against local entities)
Steuben v. City of Lincoln, 249 Neb. 270 (treating inverse-condemnation timing under § 25-202 for municipal defendant)
Bordy v. State, 142 Neb. 714 (applying 2-year limitations for claims against the State)
Czarnick v. Loup River P. P. Dist., 190 Neb. 521 (applying § 25-218 to State takings claims)
Sports Courts of Omaha v. Meginnis, 242 Neb. 768 (rule on divested jurisdiction during appeal; exception discussed)