Continental Resources v. Fair

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF versionPDF version

Continental Resources v. Fair

Additional Case Names


Case Number
Call Date
September 28, 2021
Case Time
9:00 AM
Court Number
Scotts Bluff
Case Location
Court Type
District Court
Case Summary

S-21-0074 Continental Resources v. Kevin L. Fair (Appellant)

Scotts Bluff County District Court, Hon. Leo P. Dobrovolny

Attorneys: Michael W. Meister, Jennifer Gaughan, Mark T. Bestul (Legal Aid of Nebraska, for Appellant); Gregory C. Scaglione, Casandra M. Langstaff (Koley Jessen, PC, LLO, for Appellee, Continental Resources); James A. Campbell (Solicitor General, Office of the Attorney General, for Appellee, Attorney General)

Civil: Quiet title; Due process; 42 U.S.C. § 1983

Proceedings below: The district court awarded title of the property to the Appellee, Continental Resources. The district court dismissed the unjust enrichment claim following motions to dismiss filed by the various Appellees. The district court also determined that there was no violation of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, § 21 of the Nebraska Constitution because there was no taking by the government; that the just compensation sought by Appellant was inappropriate because the tax sale was not a taking; that procedural and substantive due process was not violated; that the tax sale process did not impose an excessive fine upon the Appellant; and no specific determination was made as to whether the Appellant’s rights under Article I, § 25 of the Nebraska Constitution were violated. The district court determined that the claim for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 failed, and the court denied the request for an injunction.

Issues on appeal: Whether the district court erred 1) in granting summary judgment as the statutory scheme set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 77-1801 et seq. violates the Due Process Clause of the Federal and State Constitutions facially and as applied; 2) in granting summary judgment as the tax sale statutes violate the Takings Clauses of the United States or Nebraska Constitutions facially and as applied; 3) in granting summary judgment as it failed to recognized the Appellant’s Eighth Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution; 4) in granting summary judgment as it failed to recognize the Appellant’s rights to property under the 25th Amendment of the Nebraska Constitution; and that 5) the statutory scheme created by the Nebraska Legislature creates a special class in contravention of Neb. Const. art. III, § 18.

Schedule Code