SID No. 67 v. State, 309 Neb. 600

SID No. 67 (Normandy Hills) is a Nebraska sanitary and improvement district that maintained subdivision streets and raised funds by taxes and bonds.
NDOT and Sarpy County reconstructed Highway 75 in 2003-04, blocking two direct subdivision accesses and rerouting traffic via a longer frontage-road route.
SID 67 sued in inverse condemnation, alleging the project took or damaged its roads and claiming ownership of the roads by plat dedication (plat not attached to petition).
County court appraisers found $0 damages; SID 67 sought review in district court; NDOT and Sarpy moved to dismiss for lack of standing/real party in interest.
District court dismissed on the pleadings for lack of standing; Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, holding SID 67 is a political subdivision, not a “person” with “private property,” and thus cannot bring an inverse condemnation action against the State.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court should have considered evidence outside the pleadings when defendants moved to dismiss for lack of standing	SID 67: ownership of roads is a factual question requiring consideration of the plat and evidence	NDOT/Sarpy: motions were facial challenges filed at pleadings stage; no evidentiary hearing warranted	Court: challenge was facial; court properly limited review to pleadings and did not err in excluding extra-pleading evidence
Whether SID 67 is the real party in interest / a “person” with “private property” entitled to bring an inverse condemnation action against the State	SID 67: it owns the streets (by dedication) and thus suffered a taking or damage, entitling it to compensation	NDOT/Sarpy: SID is a state-created political subdivision that holds property only by legislative grace and is not a “person” owning private property for Takings Clause purposes	Court: SID is a political subdivision, not a “person” with private property; lacks standing to sue the State in inverse condemnation; dismissal affirmed

S.I.D. No. 95 v. City of Omaha, 221 Neb. 272 (1985) (political subdivisions hold powers/property at Legislature’s pleasure; cannot assert constitutional takings against the State)
Rock Cty. v. Spire, 235 Neb. 434 (1990) (county is not a “person” for due process/takings protections and cannot claim compensation when the State reclaims property)
United States v. 50 Acres of Land, 469 U.S. 24 (1984) (federal government must compensate a State when it takes property held by that State; recognizes separate-sovereign rule)
Knick v. Township of Scott, 139 S. Ct. 2162 (2019) (inverse condemnation is the landowner’s route to recover for uncompensated takings)
S.I.D. No. 1 v. Adamy, 289 Neb. 913 (2015) (describes SIDs as local government units and their public-improvement functions)