State ex rel. Peterson v. Shively, 310 Neb. 1

Nebraska Election Act (originating in the Honest Election Law of 1913) authorizes the Governor to appoint election commissioners in counties over 100,000 population; Lancaster, Douglas, and Sarpy counties are affected.
In September 2019 the Nebraska Attorney General issued an opinion concluding election commissioners and their chief deputies are "county officers" under Neb. Const. art. IX, § 4, and that statutory appointment provisions therefore are unconstitutional.
Governor Ricketts responded he would refuse to make appointments based on the opinion, prompting litigation; the Attorney General sued the county election commissioners and chief deputies, with the Governor and Secretary of State intervening for respondents.
The district court granted summary judgment for respondents, holding election commissioners are not "county officers" under art. IX, § 4, and that the appointment statutes are constitutional; the court relied on statutory text, legislative history, and longstanding practice.
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed: it held the Legislature has broad discretion to create and define county offices, omitted election commissioners from the statutory list of county officers and classified them as county employees, and adopted the differing statutory removal schemes as evidence of legislative intent.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether election commissioners and chief deputies are "county officers" under Neb. Const. art. IX, § 4	Peterson (AG): They are county officers because their duties partake of sovereign power, have statutory tenure, oath/bond requirements, and enforcement authority	Respondents/Intervenors: Legislature did not designate them county officers; statutes treat them as county employees, omit them from county-officer salary statutes, and create separate removal procedures	Court: Not county officers; Legislature has discretion to define county offices and omitted them from county-officer classification
Whether statutes authorizing gubernatorial appointment of election commissioners in large counties violate art. IX, § 4	Peterson: If election commissioners are county officers, appointment statutes violate requirement that county officers be elected	Respondents/Intervenors: Appointment is within Legislature’s broad authority; long-standing statutory scheme and practice; statutes constitutional	Court: Appointment statutes constitutional and appointments valid

State, ex rel. O'Connor v. Tusa, 130 Neb. 528, 265 N.W. 524 (1936) (discusses when a public position constitutes a constitutional "office")
State, ex rel. Meissner v. McHugh, 120 Neb. 356, 233 N.W. 1 (1930) (identifying county election officials in prior litigation)
State, ex rel. Harte v. Moorhead, 99 Neb. 527, 156 N.W. 1067 (1916) (commentary on framers' intent that county officers be elected)
Dinsmore v. State, 61 Neb. 418, 85 N.W. 445 (1901) (upholding Legislature's authority to create county offices and discretion over their character)
Dwyer v. Omaha-Douglas Public Bldg. Comm'n, 188 Neb. 30, 195 N.W.2d 236 (1972) (legislative construction of statutory/constitutional provisions entitled to great weight)
Maggio v. Zeitz, 333 U.S. 56 (1948) (federal discussion of the phrase "as may be necessary" as conferring discretionary authority)