Court Opinion

ID: 9698122
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 19:42:33.276849+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:38.524502
License: Public Domain

*510White, C. Thomas, J.,
dissenting.
The majority omits in its discussion of de novo review a significant part of that standard. When credible evidence on material questions of fact is in conflict, we will consider that the trial court observed the witnesses and their manner of testifying and accepted one version of the facts rather than the other. See Shirk v. Schmunk, 192 Neb. 25, 218 N. W. 2d 433.
The majority concludes that it is better able to determine on a reading of the record, than was the trial judge who saw, heard, and observed the witnesses, who was truthful and who was not. I confess that the record does not speak as plainly to me as it does to the majority. I would have placed great reliance on the findings of the trial judge.