In re Estate of Brown-Elliott, 930 N.W.2d 51

Decedent Demariont’e Brown‑Elliott (age 12) drowned in a school pool; his mother Adrienne Elliott was appointed special administrator of his estate and settled a wrongful death claim with Omaha Public Schools for $250,000, approved by the county court.
After attorney fees ($83,564) were approved, Elliott sought distribution of the remaining funds to herself as surviving mother; Bernard Brown, Sr. (father) sought equitable distribution and attorney fees, claiming exclusion from settlement negotiations.
Evidence at an evidentiary hearing: Brown had limited contact with Demariont’e after a divorce from Elliott (essentially present only during the child’s infancy and sporadically thereafter), made few child‑support payments, and had felony convictions; Elliott was the primary caregiver and was extensively involved in the child’s life.
The county court found Brown had negligible parental contact (described as "less than two hours" though the court later acknowledged this was a miscalculation) and that Elliott suffered the vast majority of the pecuniary loss; it awarded the entire distributable settlement ($166,782) to Elliott.
Brown appealed, arguing the findings on parent‑child relationship and contact were erroneous, that the settlement allocation was improper, and that he was excluded from settlement negotiations (unclean hands claim).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Brown)	Defendant's Argument (Elliott)	Held
Whether county court erred in findings about Brown’s parent‑child relationship	Court’s findings were contrary to evidence, biased, and abused discretion	Findings reflected credible evidence of near‑total absence after divorce	Affirmed: findings supported by record; no bias or arbitrary decision
Whether court erred in finding Brown had very little contact with decedent	The "less than two hours" finding and <1% contact conclusion were contrary to evidence	Any miscalculation was minor; the substantive conclusion of near‑total absence stands	Court erred in precise time calc but error was harmless; conclusion supported
Whether entire wrongful death settlement could be awarded to Elliott	Awarding Brown nothing was improper; he suffered some loss	Under §30‑810, distribution based on pecuniary loss; Elliott’s loss far greater given her caregiving	Affirmed: Elliott’s pecuniary loss overwhelmingly exceeded Brown’s; she receives entire share
Whether Elliott’s alleged exclusion of Brown from settlement negotiations required relief (unclean hands)	Brown was excluded and had adverse interests, so settlement process tainted	Brown consented to Elliott’s appointment and waived many notices; record lacks proof of meaningful exclusion	No merit: record shows no meaningful exclusion and no prejudice; claim rejected

In re Estate of Panec, 291 Neb. 46, 864 N.W.2d 219 (standard of appellate review in probate matters)
Worth v. Kolbeck, 273 Neb. 163, 728 N.W.2d 282 (admission/exclusion of evidence requires prejudice to be reversible)
Brandon v. County of Richardson, 261 Neb. 636, 624 N.W.2d 604 (wrongful death damages include parental loss of society, comfort, and companionship)
In re Estate of Lucht, 139 Neb. 139, 296 N.W. 749 (parent who was essentially a stranger suffered no compensable pecuniary loss)
Osantowski v. Osantowski, 298 Neb. 339, 904 N.W.2d 251 (errors argued but not assigned are not considered absent plain error)