State ex rel. Veskrna v. Steel, 296 Neb. 581

Plaintiff Les W. Veskrna requested Judicial Branch Education (JBE) records (presentations, presenter IDs, materials) on child custody/parenting time since July 1, 2012; State Court Administrator Corey Steel denied request asserting confidentiality.
Steel relied on an unwritten JBE advisory committee policy, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 24-205.01, and Neb. Ct. R. § 1-512(A) to argue the records are not "public records" under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 84-712.01(1).
Veskrna argued the public records act applies to the judiciary, no statutory exemption shields these administrative JBE materials, and disclosure does not impair judicial functions.
District court conducted in camera review of 12 documents, concluded most were public records (redacting one internal judge email under the deliberative privilege), and issued a writ of mandamus ordering disclosure.
Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed: statutory authorization to promulgate confidentiality rules did not itself exempt records; judicial deliberative-process privilege narrowly applies and did not cover the JBE materials at issue; separation-of-powers was not unduly implicated by disclosure of these documents.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Veskrna)	Defendant's Argument (Steel)	Held
Whether requested JBE materials are "public records" under § 84-712.01	Records are public; no statutory exemption applies	Unwritten Committee policy plus § 24-205.01 and court rule authorize confidentiality, thus records are not public	Records are public; statute authorizing future rules does not "expressly provide" exemption
Whether an unwritten Committee policy can exempt records from disclosure	N/A (challenges policy as insufficient)	Unwritten longstanding policy makes JBE records confidential	Unwritten policy is insufficient; rulemaking/adoption by the Supreme Court required for confidentiality
Whether disclosure violates separation of powers by impairing judicial functions	Disclosure does not unduly interfere with judicial functions	Mandatory disclosure of JBE records would intrude on judicial administration and independence	Disclosure here does not unduly interfere; separation-of-powers concern requires case-by-case analysis and narrow privilege
Whether the judicial deliberative-process privilege shields the JBE materials	Most JBE materials are administrative and not privileged	Judicial deliberative privilege applies broadly to JBE because education is intertwined with deliberation	Adopted a narrow, absolute deliberative-process privilege; however, the JBE records at issue did not fall within it except for a redacted internal judge email

State ex rel. Unger v. State, 293 Neb. 549 (recognition that public-records statutes apply to judicial branch in prior Nebraska precedent)
State v. Ellsworth, 61 Neb. 444 (1901) (historical support for public access to certain judicial records)
United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974) (limits on overly broad governmental privileges; framework for narrowly tailoring privileges)
In re Enforcement of Subpoena, 463 Mass. 162 (2012) (description of judicial deliberations privilege adopted as model)