857 N.W.2d 561
Neb.2015Background
- On Jan. 19, 2010, Jacquelyn Stick slipped on ice on a City-owned sidewalk leading from the Montclair Community Center to its parking lot and fractured her patella.
- Stick sued the City of Omaha under the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act (PSTCA), alleging negligent maintenance and failure to remove ice or apply deicing materials.
- The City moved for summary judgment, asserting Stick’s claim was barred by the PSTCA’s “snow or ice” exception, § 13-910(10), and alternatively that the City lacked notice of the condition.
- Evidence showed no overnight precipitation; Stick testified fog/dampness existed when entering, and that icy conditions developed while she was inside; she also noted the slab she slipped on appeared newer and slicker.
- The district court found the sidewalk was an "other public place" under § 13-910(10), that the icy condition was caused by nature (temporary, weather-related), and granted summary judgment for the City.
- On appeal the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, holding § 13-910(10) barred the claim and declining to reach the alternate no-notice ground.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sidewalk is a "public place" under § 13-910(10) | "Public place" should be limited to areas traversed by motor vehicles (e.g., streets/highways); sidewalks not covered | The sidewalk is maintained by the City for public use and fits the plain meaning of "public place" | Court held the sidewalk is an "other public place" within § 13-910(10) |
| Whether icy condition was "caused by nature" / due to weather | Stick argued her observation about newer, slicker concrete could imply non-natural causes or City-controlled factors | City pointed to weather records and testimony showing conditions consistent with natural/temporary ice formation | Court held icy condition was temporary and caused by nature (no genuine factual dispute) |
| Whether plaintiff’s deposition comment about sidewalk materials created a triable issue | Stick argued the newer/slicker slab suggested construction/materials contributed and created a factual dispute | City noted complaint asserted only negligence re: snow/ice removal and offered no evidence linking construction to the fall | Court held the comment was insufficient to plead or create a genuine issue about construction/materials contributing to the fall |
| Applicability of PSTCA waiver/exemptions (statutory construction) | Stick urged ejusdem generis to limit "other public place" to vehicular locations | City urged plain meaning; exemptions should be broadly read in favor of sovereign immunity | Court applied plain meaning and strict construction in favor of immunity, holding § 13-910(10) barred the claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Latzel v. Bartek, 288 Neb. 1 (summary judgment standard applied)
- Hall v. County of Lancaster, 287 Neb. 969 (PSTCA exemptions preclude suit when applicable)
- McKenna v. Julian, 277 Neb. 522 (PSTCA waivers strictly construed against waiver)
- Zawaideh v. Nebraska Dept. of Health & Human Servs., 285 Neb. 48 (sovereign-immunity waiver must be express)
- Kluver v. City of Hinton, 924 P.2d 306 (Okla. App. 1996) (persuasive authority treating sidewalk claim as within snow/ice exception)
- Porter v. Grant County Bd. of Educ., 633 S.E.2d 38 (W. Va. 2006) (persuasive authority applying similar public-place exemption)