State v. McColery, 297 Neb. 53

Defendant Scott McColery posted a $5,000 appearance bond in a criminal case and assigned those bond funds to his private attorney for legal fees.
The State filed an affidavit of lien for overdue child support showing McColery owed over $18,000, asserting the court-held bond funds were subject to garnishment.
After conviction, McColery moved to release the $5,000 bond to his attorney; the district court denied the motion.
The district court’s order declined to release the funds but did not adjudicate ownership between McColery (or his attorney) and the State.
The State had not yet initiated formal garnishment proceedings when the district court denied release.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court’s order denying immediate release of bond funds is a final, appealable order affecting a substantial right	McColery: denial foreclosed release and thus affected his attorney’s entitlement to funds, so the order is appealable	State: order merely withheld funds pending garnishment and did not determine rights, so it is not a final order	The order is not final or appealable because it does not affect a substantial right; appeal dismissed

Big John’s Billiards v. State, 283 Neb. 496, 811 N.W.2d 205 (discusses what constitutes affecting a substantial right for final-order purposes)
Sutton v. Killham, 285 Neb. 1, 825 N.W.2d 188 (final-order analysis)
Carlos H. v. Lindsay M., 283 Neb. 1004, 815 N.W.2d 168 (final-order principles)
Pearce v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co., 293 Neb. 277, 876 N.W.2d 899 (clarifies final order criteria)
Cattle Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. Watson, 293 Neb. 943, 880 N.W.2d 906 (orders affecting substantial rights may diminish claims or defenses)