Court Opinion

ID: 9729996
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 14:56:42.870523+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:03.147680
License: Public Domain

Krivosha, C. J.,
concurring in the result.
While I concur in the result reached by the majority in this case, I write separately due to a concern that someone may misread the majority opinion and conclude that we approve the format of resolution No. 2832. In fact, we do not pass upon the propriety of such a resolution, which delegates to an administrative officer such broad authority without specific guidelines, said issue not having been raised by the parties to this case. On its face it would appear to be in violation of the longstanding rule in this jurisdiction that the Legislature must prescribe specific guidelines when delegating authority to an administrative officer. See Lincoln Dairy Co. v. Finigan, 170 Neb. 777, 104 N.W.2d 227 (1960). The majority opinion should only be understood to stand for the simple proposition that where such a resolution is enacted and no one attacks the validity of the ordinance, the ordinance does not give rise to a cause of action under the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act, Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 23-2401 et seq. (Reissue 1977).