Court Opinion

ID: 9738450
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 19:53:19.007401+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:06.173711
License: Public Domain

Lanphier, J.,
dissenting.
Summary judgment is proper only when the evidence discloses that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact or as to the ultimate inferences that may be drawn from those facts. Cimino v. FirsTier Bank, 247 Neb. 797, 530 N.W.2d 606 (1995); Jim’s, Inc. v. Willman, 247 Neb. 430, 527 N.W.2d 626 (1995). I respectfully dissent. The evidence clearly discloses a genuine issue of fact regarding the existence of an oral or written contract with Walpus which restricted METCO’s ability to terminate him as they did. Therefore, the district court erred in granting METCO’s motion for summary judgment.
White, C.J., joins in this dissent.