Court Opinion

ID: 9526337
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:15:56.253871+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:19:29.247338
License: Public Domain

Grant, J.,
concurring.
I concur with the judgment of the court, but I do not agree with the statement that “the fact that the director filed an answer on July 24,1989... is of no consequence ...” I believe the director’s filing of July 24 constituted a voluntary appearance and was “equivalent to service” within the meaning of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-516.01 (Reissue 1989). The fact that that voluntary filing was an answer does not change the application of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-821 (Reissue 1989), which, in substance, requires an answer to be “filed within thirty days after service” and thus establishes an “answer day,” which may well be different from the day on which an answer is filed.
Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-420 (Reissue 1984), plaintiff was required to “file the transcript before answer day.” Answer day in this case would be calculated by counting 30 days from July 24, 1989, the date of service as determined by the date of the *838filing of the director’s voluntary appearance. That answer day would be August 23, 1989. Plaintiff filed the transcript from the director on August 21, 1989.1 believe the district court had jurisdiction of the appeal from the director’s order on that basis.
Caporale, J., joins in this concurrence.