State v. McColery, 297 Neb. 53

Scott McColery posted a $5,000 appearance bond in an underlying criminal case and then 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; the lien asserted the court-held bond funds were subject to garnishment.
McColery moved to release the $5,000 bond funds to his attorney; the district court overruled the motion and left the funds held in court.
McColery appealed the district court’s order denying release of the funds.
The sole legal question is whether the order denying release of the bond funds constituted a final, appealable order because it affected a substantial right.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court’s order denying release of bond funds is a final, appealable order affecting a substantial right	McColery: denial of release is final and he may immediately appeal to obtain the funds for his attorney	State: the order does not affect a substantial right because it does not determine ownership—funds remain in court and garnishment has not been pursued	Court: order is not final or appealable; it does not resolve parties’ rights to the funds and appeal is premature

Big John’s Billiards v. State, 283 Neb. 496, 811 N.W.2d 205 (2012) (defines when an order affects a substantial right for appealability)
Sutton v. Killham, 285 Neb. 1, 825 N.W.2d 188 (2013) (discusses finality and appeal standards)
Carlos H. v. Lindsay M., 283 Neb. 1004, 815 N.W.2d 168 (2012) (addresses final order and substantial-right analysis)
Pearce v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co., 293 Neb. 277, 876 N.W.2d 899 (2016) (precedent on final-order requirements)
Cattle Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. Watson, 293 Neb. 943, 880 N.W.2d 906 (2016) (clarifies what constitutes diminution of a claim or defense)