Preserve the Sandhills, LLC v. Cherry County, Nebraska

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF versionPDF version

Preserve the Sandhills, LLC v. Cherry County, Nebraska

Additional Case Names

Appellant via Webex

Case Number
S-20-0726
Call Date
August 31, 2021
Case Time
9:00 AM
Court Number
Cherry
Case Location
Lincoln
Court Type
District Court
Case Summary

S-20-0726 Preserve the Sandhills, LLC, Charlene Reiser-McCormick, William Schmit, Danielle Robinson, Shawn and Kayte Robinson, Jim and Anita Robinson, John Hamilton, Kort Hamilton, Marion and Merrial Rhoades, Wayne Eatinger, and Deborah Galloway v. Cherry County, Nebraska; Cherry County Board of Commissioners; BSH Kilgore, LLC; Cherry County Wind, LLC; and Bluestem Sandhills, LLC

Cherry County District Court, Hon. Mark D. Kozisek

Attorneys: Diana J. Vogt (Sherrets Bruno & Vogt, LLC, for Appellants); Steven D. Davidson & Spencer R. Murphy (Baird Holm LLP, for Appellees/Cross-Appellants BSH Kilgore, LLC and Bluestem Sandhills, LLC); Eric A. Scott (Cherry County Attorney), David S. Houghton & Justin D. Eichmann (Houghton Bradford Whitted, PC, LLO, for Appellees Cherry Co., Nebraska and Cherry Co. Board of Commissioners); Steven G. Ranum & Richard A. DeWitt (Croker, Huck, Kasher, DeWitt, Anderson & Gonderinger, LLC, for Appellee Cherry Co. Wind, LLC)

Proceedings Below: The district court determined that the de novo review authorized by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1937 and In re Olmer, 275 Neb. 852, 752 N.W.2d 124 (2008) applies only to appeals from the grant or denial of conditional use. The district court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to conduct a de novo review of the County Board’s decision to extend the time for performance of a conditional use and dismissed Appellants’ appeal.

Issues on Appeal: Whether the district court erred in 1) concluding that the Appellants were not entitled to a de novo review of the County Board’s decision regarding the extension of the conditional use permit; and 2) dismissing the case because it did not accept the Appellant’s requested standard of review, rather than simply applying a different standard of review.

Issue on Cross-Appeal: Whether the district court erred in failing to dismiss the case for the separate and independent reason that the petition on appeal failed to state a plausible claim upon which relief can be granted.

Schedule Code
SC