Opinion ID: 2231486
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: Appealability of Revivor Orders Under Existing Approach in Nebraska

Text: In the case at bar, the Lasens argue that the order of revivor was immediately appealable because Platte Valley sought to revive the action under the method prescribed in §§ 25-1403 to 25-1420. Conversely, Platte Valley argues that the order was not immediately appealable because it claims to have revived the action under § 25-322. This court has held that when the method of revivor set forth in §§ 25-1403 to 25-1420 is followed, a conditional order of revivor made absolute is a final order and appealable. See Levin v. Muser, 107 Neb. 230, 185 N.W. 431 (1921). In Levin v. Muser , on the plaintiff's motion, a conditional order of revivor was entered, and in pursuance of that order, the court revived the action after finding that no sufficient cause had been shown against the revivor. The defendant immediately appealed. On appeal, the issue arose whether the revivor order was final and appealable. Based on our statutory definition of a final order found in Rev. Stat. § 8176 (1913) (now Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1902 (Reissue 1995)), this court concluded that the order was appealable, even though it neither terminated the action nor constituted a final disposition of the case, because it was made in a special proceeding and it affected a substantial right. We stated that in cases where the special statutory method of revivor [i.e., §§ 25-1403 to 25-1420] is followed, as distinguished from the procedure to revive by the filing of supplemental pleadings and the issuance of summons ... and where the conditional order is made and, in pursuance thereof, an absolute order of revivor entered ... the absolute order conclusively adjudicates the matters regarding the right of revivor, and those questions cannot then be later tried along with the merits of the case, nor reviewed on an appeal from the final judgment. Levin v. Muser, 107 Neb. at 232, 185 N.W. at 432. This revivor method was considered to be an independent and special proceeding rather than a provisional remedy that was merely incidental to and a part of the main case.