McGauley v. Washington County, 297 Neb. 134

After severe Missouri River flooding in 2011, Washington County lacked resources to protect the county-owned access road CR P30 to the county quarry.
Martin Marietta (Marietta), the quarry operator, requested and received an oral easement from a county emergency subcommittee to raise/repair CR P30; a formal easement and indemnity were signed later.
Marietta performed the work alone, following Mine Safety & Health Administration–style precautions (daily safety meetings, berms, lights, warnings); the County did not supervise, place signs, or provide lighting.
On June 9, 2011, quarry truck driver James McGauley drove off the road where no berm existed, the shoulder collapsed, the truck flipped into floodwaters, and McGauley drowned.
McGauley’s personal representative sued the County and Marietta; the district court held a bench trial limited to sovereign immunity and dismissed claims against the County under the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act (PSTCA) discretionary-function exception.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the County is immune under PSTCA discretionary-function exception	County’s choices to allow Marietta to build the road were discretionary but its failures to supervise/enforce safety were separate, non-discretionary duties, so immunity does not apply	The decision to allow Marietta to build the road (and related lack of supervision/enforcement given resource limits) was a discretionary policymaking choice protected by immunity	Court held County’s decision was discretionary and within exception; immunity applies
Whether County had a nondiscretionary duty to warn/take protective measures	County had a duty because it controlled CR P30 and knew of hazards, so discretionary exception should not bar suit	No nondiscretionary duty existed because dangerous conditions were readily apparent to Marietta workers who were warned; therefore exception remains	Court held no nondiscretionary duty to warn existed (conditions were apparent and workers had warnings); exception did not yield to a duty

Mix v. City of Lincoln, 244 Neb. 561 (procedural standard for PSTCA findings)
Cotton v. State, 281 Neb. 789 (statutory interpretation as question of law)
Shipley v. Department of Roads, 283 Neb. 832 (discretionary-function test; nondiscretionary duty to warn exception)
Kimminau v. City of Hastings, 291 Neb. 133 (purpose of discretionary-function exception)
McCormick v. City of Norfolk, 263 Neb. 693 (policy decisions and resource constraints relevant to discretionary-function analysis)