History
  • No items yet
midpage
837 N.W.2d 826
Neb. Ct. App.
2013
Read the full case

Background

  • On Sept. 15, 2009, Faye Spracklin was a passenger in a car driven by Eugene G. Spracklin and was injured in an accident; Eugene was Faye’s father‑in‑law (Faye was married to Eugene’s son, Gordon).
  • Faye sued Eugene’s estate (represented by Gordon) for negligence and damages in May 2012; Eugene had died prior to suit.
  • Gordon pleaded the Motor Vehicle Guest Statute, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25‑21,237 (in effect at the time of the accident), as an affirmative defense, alleging Faye was a related guest barred from recovery unless gross negligence or intoxication was shown.
  • Parties stipulated at summary judgment that Faye paid no compensation, Eugene was not intoxicated, and there was no gross negligence; the only dispute was whether Faye was “related” to Eugene within the second degree of affinity under § 25‑21,237.
  • The district court held that “affinity” equals the in‑law relationship created by marriage, found Faye was within the second degree of affinity to Eugene (daughter‑in‑law), granted summary judgment for the estate, and dismissed Faye’s claim with prejudice.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether Faye was “related to” driver within the second degree of affinity under § 25‑21,237, thus a guest barred from recovery Faye argued the statute did not make a driver’s daughter‑in‑law a barred guest; she contended affinity should not be read to include her relationship Gordon argued affinity = in‑laws and that Faye, as daughter‑in‑law (father‑in‑law relationship), was within the second degree of affinity and thus barred Court held affinity means the in‑law relationship created by marriage; Faye was within the second degree of affinity and barred from recovery under § 25‑21,237

Key Cases Cited

  • Zimmerer v. Prudential Ins. Co., 150 Neb. 351 (definition of affinity as relation arising from marriage to blood relations of the other spouse)
  • State v. Vidales, 6 Neb. App. 163 (noting affinity = in‑laws and interchangeable with term "in‑laws")
  • Pinkard v. Confederation Life Ins. Co., 264 Neb. 312 (statement of summary judgment standard)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Spracklin v. Spracklin
Court Name: Nebraska Court of Appeals
Date Published: Sep 10, 2013
Citations: 837 N.W.2d 826; 21 Neb. App. 271; 21 Neb. Ct. App. 271; A-12-834
Docket Number: A-12-834
Court Abbreviation: Neb. Ct. App.
Log In