McGauley v. Washington County, 897 N.W.2d 851

June 2011 floods: Washington County faced an emergency and lacked resources to protect the only access road (CR P30) to Marietta’s quarry, which was needed for flood response.
County granted Marietta an oral easement (formalized later) to raise CR P30 so the quarry could continue operations and supply materials for flood mitigation.
Marietta built the road to mine-industry practices, used lights, berms, and held daily safety meetings warning workers about soft shoulders and to stay off them.
On June 9, 2011, quarry truck driver James McGauley drove off a shoulder where no berm existed (due to ongoing work), the shoulder collapsed, and he drowned.
McGauley’s personal representative sued Washington County and Marietta; the district court held a bench trial on sovereign immunity and dismissed claims against the County under the PSTCA’s discretionary function exception.
On appeal the Nebraska Supreme Court considered whether the County’s choices were discretionary policy decisions shielded by sovereign immunity or whether a nondiscretionary duty to warn/protect applied.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether County’s decision to allow Marietta to raise CR P30 is protected by the PSTCA discretionary-function exception	McGauley: County’s decisions not to supervise or enforce safety were separate, non-discretionary acts and not shielded by immunity	County: Granting easement and foregoing supervision were discretionary policy choices amid emergency and limited resources	Held: The County’s decision to allow Marietta to build the road was a discretionary policy judgment protected by the PSTCA discretionary-function exception
Whether County had a nondiscretionary duty to warn or take protective measures that would negate discretionary-function immunity	McGauley: County had notice and thus a duty to warn or protect workers on the County-controlled road	County: Workers were Marietta employees; Marietta provided warnings and safety measures; hazards were apparent to workers	Held: No nondiscretionary duty existed—hazards were readily apparent to Marietta’s workers (including McGauley), so the exception to immunity did not apply

Mix v. City of Lincoln, 244 Neb. 561 (discussing standards of review for PSTCA findings)
Shipley v. Department of Roads, 283 Neb. 832 (sets out discretionary-function analysis and nondiscretionary-duty exception)
McCormick v. City of Norfolk, 263 Neb. 693 (examples of policy decisions shielded by immunity)
Kimminau v. City of Hastings, 291 Neb. 133 (purpose of discretionary-function exception to avoid judicial second-guessing)
Cotton v. State, 281 Neb. 789 (appellate review of statutory interpretation)