S-24-0326 and S-24-0327 State ex rel. Steve Seeman and State ex rel. SBS Farms, Inc. and Robert Bishop, President (Appellees and Cross-Appellants) v. The Chairman and Board of Directors of the Lower Republican Natural Resources District, Marlin Murdoch, Chairman, Clark Andrews, Toby TenBensel, Bill Bose, Tim Kahrs, Treasurer, Matt Harrison, Nelson Trambley, Dave Bartels, Secretary, Lee Fintel, Donn Duffy, Brad Wulf, and Todd Siel, General Manager (Appellants and Cross-Appellees)
Appeal from the District Court for Harlan County, Judge Terri Harder
Attorneys: Donald G. Blankenau and Kennon G. Meyer (Blankenau Wilmoth Jarecke LLP for Appellants and Cross-Appellees), David A. Domina (Domina Law Group, PC, LLO for Appellees and Cross-Appellants), Matthew R. Watson and Andrew M. Pope (Crites, Shaffer, Connealy Watson Patras & Watson, PC, LLO filing amicus curiae for Nebraska Groundwater Coalition), and Michael T. Hilgers, Justin D. Lavene, and Joshua E. Dethlefsen (Office of the Nebraska Attorney General filing amicus curiae for Nebraska Department of Natural Resources).
Civil: Mandamus and water rights
Proceedings below: The district court issued two identical orders granting writs of mandamus to Appellees effectively ordering the Natural Resources District to reverse penalties placed on the subject acres in separate litigation from 2016. On its own motion, the Supreme Court ordered this case to be transferred from the docket of the Court of Appeals to its docket.
Issues: Appellants make the following assignments of error: 1) The trial court erred in finding it had subject matter jurisdiction to grant the mandamus relief ordered; 2) The trial court erred in permitting a collateral attack on a final administrative order that was appealed to a district court and court of appeals; 3) The trial court erred in finding Appellees had met their burden to show clearly and conclusively a right to the mandamus relief ordered; 4) The trial court erred in finding Appellees had met their burden to show clearly and conclusively a corresponding legal duty on the part of Appellants to provide the mandamus relief ordered; and 5) The trial court erred in finding that Appellee’s were entitled to attorney fees.
Appellees make the following assignment of error on cross-appeal: 1) The district court erred when it did not decide that the challenged order is void for the additional reason that it is a perpetual prohibition against irrigation and upon transfer of title and use of Appellants’ land.