Nyamatore v. Schuerman
25 Neb. Ct. App. 209
| Neb. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- On June 19, 2015, Eunice Nyamatore was injured in a bus accident involving Omaha Transit Authority (OTA).
- On July 9, 2015, Nyamatore (through counsel) sent a written notice of claim to Edith Simpson, OTA’s legal and human resources director; Simpson was the only named recipient.
- Curt Simon, OTA’s executive director, was the only OTA official whose duty it was to maintain OTA’s official records (the statutorily designated recipient under the PSTCA).
- Simpson later corresponded with Nyamatore’s counsel about settlement (letters dated April 15, 2016, and May 13, 2016). Nyamatore filed suit on May 5, 2016, within one year of the accident.
- OTA asserted as an affirmative defense that Nyamatore failed to comply with the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act (PSTCA) notice requirement (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 13-905/13-919), moved for summary judgment, and the district court granted the motion. Nyamatore appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether notice to Simpson satisfied PSTCA requirement to file "with the official whose duty it is to maintain the official records" | Nyamatore: her July 9 letter to Simpson substantially complied and put OTA on notice | OTA: Simpson was not the designated recordkeeper; notice had to be to the executive director (Curt Simon) or designated official | Court: Notice to Simpson was insufficient; strict statutory designation controls and summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether OTA’s settlement communications estop OTA from asserting defective notice | Nyamatore: Simpson’s settlement offers and communications induced reliance and misled counsel, warranting equitable estoppel | OTA: No affirmative misrepresentation about the statutory filing process; claimant (and counsel) had means to learn proper procedure | Court: Equitable estoppel not available against OTA on these facts; no compelling circumstances or affirmative misrepresentation |
Key Cases Cited
- Estate of McElwee v. Omaha Transit Auth., 266 Neb. 317 (holding notice to non-designated HR director did not satisfy § 13-905)
- Brothers v. Kimball Cty. Hosp., 289 Neb. 879 (strict compliance with designated recipient requirement; no estoppel absent misrepresentation)
- Niemoller v. City of Papillion, 276 Neb. 40 (substantial-compliance analysis inapplicable when claim not filed with statutorily designated official)
- Steckelberg v. Nebraska State Patrol, 294 Neb. 842 (equitable-estoppel standard; de novo review in equity appeals)
- Willis v. City of Lincoln, 232 Neb. 533 (no estoppel where claimant was not informed of PSTCA filing requirement and no affirmative misrepresentation)