Adams Land and Cattle, LLC v. Widdowson

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF versionPDF version

Adams Land and Cattle, LLC v. Widdowson

Case Number
Call Date
March 28, 2023
Case Time
9:00 AM
Court Number
Box Butte
Case Location
Court Type
District Court
Case Summary

S-22-0534 Adams Land and Cattle, LLC, d/b/a Adams Land and Cattle Co. (Appellee) v. John Widdowson, Adam Sawyer, Terry Cone, Jay Martindale, and Christopher Gentry (Appellants)

Appeal from the District Court for Box Butte County, Judge Travis P. O’Gorman

Attorneys:  Joshua E. Dethlefsen, Justin D. Lavene, and Maegan L. Woita (Asst. Attorneys General for Appellant) and Greg C. Scaglione and Michele Young (Koley Jessen, P.C., L.L.O. for Appellee)

Civil:  Permanent Injunction and Registered Feedlot Requirements

Proceedings below:  Appellants, as previous or current members of the Nebraska Brand Committee, informed Appellees that under Nebraska law, brand inspections are required for any cattle arriving at a registered feedlot from any place other than directly from the point of origin with a brand clearance, certificate of inspection, or other satisfactory evidence of ownership.  Appellee disagreed with this interpretation of Nebraska law, and Appellees sought a permanent injunction, which the trial court sustained.  Appellants filed a Petition to Bypass the Court of Appeals, which this Court sustained and transferred this matter to the Supreme Court docket. 

Issues:  Appellants make the following assignments of error:  1) The District Court erred by granting declaratory and injunctive relief in favor of Adams; 2) The District Court erred by finding that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 54-1,122 does not require direct movement from the point of origin with required paperwork to avoid a brand inspection upon entry to the registered feedlot; 3) The District Court erred in failing to construe Neb. Rev. Stat. § 54-1,122 consistent with the statutory purpose of the Nebraska Livestock Brand Act; 4) The District Court erred by failing to take into account the fact that the Brand Committee has administered the registered feedlot program consistently for every other registered feedlot since at least 2009, except Adams; 5)  The District Court erred by failing to recognize that the 2009 vote of the Brand Committee was abrogated by a Brand Committee vote in December, 2021; 6) The District Court erred by finding that the 2016 Attorney General Opinion supported Adams’s argument; and 7) The District Court erred by awarding costs to Adams.

Schedule Code