Opinion ID: 6326866
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: standard of review

Text: [2] Whether a stay of proceedings should be granted and arbitration required is a question of law. 2 When reviewing questions of law, this court has an obligation to resolve the questions independently of the conclusion reached by the trial court. 3 [3] In an appeal of an equity action, this court tries factual questions de novo on the record and reaches a conclusion independent of the findings of the trial court; provided, where the credible evidence is in conflict on a material issue of fact, we consider and may give weight to the fact that the trial 1 Amend v. Nebraska Pub. Serv. Comm., 298 Neb. 617, 905 N.W.2d 551 (2018). 2 Good Samaritan Coffee Co. v. LaRue Distributing, 275 Neb. 674, 748 N.W.2d 367 (2008). 3 Id. - 903 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 310 Nebraska Reports NOAH’S ARK PROCESSORS v. UNIFIRST CORP. Cite as 310 Neb. 896 judge heard and observed the witnesses and accepted one version of the facts rather than another. 4 [4-6] A trial court has the discretion to determine the rele­ vancy and admissibility of evidence, and such determinations will not be disturbed on appeal unless they constitute an abuse of that discretion. 5 Apart from rulings under the residual hearsay exception, an appellate court reviews for clear error the factual findings underpinning a trial court’s hearsay ruling and reviews de novo the court’s ultimate determination to admit evidence over a hearsay objection or exclude evidence on hearsay grounds. 6 In a civil case, the admission or exclusion of evidence is not reversible error unless it unfairly prejudiced a substantial right of the complaining party. 7