Jennings Plant Servs. v. Ellerbrock-Norris Agency, 318 Neb. 138

Shawn Kimbrough was killed in a car accident involving a Jennings Plant Services employee driving a company-owned Ford F-150.
Kimbrough, as special administrator of the decedent's estate, obtained a judgment for $5.4 million against Jennings in federal court.
Jennings Plant Services sued its insurance broker, Ellerbrock-Norris Agency, in state court alleging negligent failure to advise adequate insurance coverage for company-owned vehicles.
Jennings had assigned Kimbrough a right to 85% of any proceeds from its state court claim against Ellerbrock-Norris as partial settlement of the federal judgment.
Kimbrough filed a motion to intervene in the state lawsuit under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-328, arguing her assigned interest in the lawsuit proceeds entitled her to participate.
The district court denied Kimbrough’s motion to intervene, finding her interest insufficiently direct; this decision was affirmed on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Kimbrough has a direct, legal interest sufficient to intervene under § 25-328	Kimbrough argued that her assigned right to a portion of any proceeds is a sufficient legal interest in the underlying litigation to permit intervention	Ellerbrock-Norris argued Kimbrough’s interest is only in potential proceeds, not in the actual claim or subject matter of the litigation, making it too indirect	The court held Kimbrough’s interest was indirect—akin to a creditor’s—and thus insufficient for intervention

Carroll v. Gould, 308 Neb. 12 (Neb. 2020) (distinguishing between direct and indirect interests required for intervention)
Ruzicka v. Ruzicka, 262 Neb. 824 (Neb. 2001) (examining property interests sufficient for intervention)
K. & C. P. R. Co. v. Fitzgerald, 33 Neb. 137 (Neb. 1891) (creditors’ indirect interests are insufficient to permit intervention)
Drainage District v. Kirkpatrick-Pettis Co., 140 Neb. 530 (Neb. 1941) (economic interests do not justify intervention by nonparty)