Lund-Ross Constructors, Inc. v. The Duke of Omaha, LLC
S-21-729 Echo Group, Inc. (Appellee/Cross-Appellant) v. IRC II, Inc., Tradesmen International, and Lund-Ross Constructors, Inc. (Appellant/Cross-Appellee)
S-21-730 Echo Group, Inc. (Appellee/Cross-Appellant) v. The Historic Florentine, LLC, Midwest Protection Services, Inc., and Lund-Ross Constructors, Inc. (Appellant/Cross-Appellee)
S-21-770 Echo Group, Inc. (Appellee/Cross-Appellant) v. The Duke of Omaha, Great Western Bank, Midwest Protection Services, Inc., and Lund-Ross Constructors, Inc. (Appellant/Cross-Appellee)
Appeals from the District Court for Douglas County, Judges J. Michael Coffey, Leigh Ann Retelsdorf, and Duane C. Dougherty.
Attorneys: David S. Houghton and Justin D. Eichmann (Houghton Bradford Law Firm for Appellants/Cross-Appellees) and Cathy S. Trent-Vilim and Craig F. Martin (Lamson Dugan Law Firm for Appellee/Cross-Appellant)
Civil: Foreclosure of construction lien; unjust enrichment; prejudgment interest
Proceedings below: In S-21-729 and S-21-730, district court granted Echo summary judgment on lien foreclosure claims but denied pre-judgment interest. In S-21-770, district court granted Echo summary judgment on lien foreclosure claims and awarded it attorney fees and prejudgment interest. On Appellant’s Motion, these cases have been consolidated for appeal. On its own motion, the Nebraska Supreme Court ordered these cases be removed from the docket of the Nebraska Court of Appeals and transferred to its docket.
Issues: Appellant/Cross-Appellee makes the following assignments of error: 1) In S-21-729, S-21-730, and S-21-770, the District Court erred in determining that there exists no genuine issue of material fact and granting Echo summary judgment on its claims for construction lien foreclosure; 2) In S-21-730 and S-21-770, the District Court erred in granting Echo summary judgment on its claims for construction lien foreclosure in an amount greater than the surety bond posted by LundRoss; and 3) In S-21-770, the District Court not only erred in granting Echo summary judgment on its claim for construction lien foreclosure in an amount greater than the surety bond posted by LundRoss, but also erred in entering judgment for the excess amount directly against Lund-Ross; 4) In S-21-770, the District Court erred in awarding Echo attorney’s fees not actually incurred in pursuit of Echo’s claim in the action pending before it; and 5) In S-21-770, the District Court erred in awarding Echo pre-judgment interest on its claim for construction lien foreclosure.