Dick v. Koski Prof. Group - supplemental opinion

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library
www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/
03/05/2021 01:09 AM CST
- 257 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
308 Nebraska Reports
DICK v. KOSKI PROF. GROUP
Cite as 308 Neb. 257Robert Dick, appellee and cross-appellant, v. Koski
Professional Group, P.C., third-party plaintiff,
appellant and cross-appellee, and Bland &
Associates, P.C., third-party defendant,
appellee and cross-appellant.
___ N.W.2d ___
Filed January 29, 2021. No. S-19-132.
supplemental opinion
Appeal from the District Court for Douglas County: J
Russell Derr, Judge. Former opinion modified. Motion for
rehearing overruled.
Robert M. Slovek and Dwyer Arce, of Kutak Rock, L.L.P.,
for appellant.
Aaron A. Clark, Ruth A. Horvatich, and Cody E.
Brookhouser-Sisney, of McGrath, North, Mullin & Kratz, P.C.,
L.L.O., for appellee Robert Dick.
Ryan M. Kunhart and Jeffrey J. Blumel, of Dvorak Law
Group, L.L.C., for appellee Bland & Associates, P.C.
Heavican, C.J., Cassel, Stacy, Funke, Papik, and
Freudenberg, JJ.
Per Curiam.
This case is before us on a motion for rehearing filed
by the appellant, Koski Professional Group, P.C. (KPG),
- 258 -
Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets
308 Nebraska Reports
DICK v. KOSKI PROF. GROUP
Cite as 308 Neb. 257concerning our opinion in Dick v. Koski Prof. Group, 307 Neb.
599, 950 N.W.2d 321 (2020).
We find no substantive merit to KPG’s motion and overrule
it, but modify the opinion as follows:
(1) In the background section, under the subheading
“Peremptory Challenges,” we withdraw the last sentence of
the sole paragraph and substitute the following: “Other than a
marked copy of a jury roster included in a supplemental tran-
script, the jury selection process is not otherwise reflected in
the appellate record.”
(2) In the analysis section, under the subheading “Peremptory
Challenges (Assignment of Error No. 1),” we withdraw the
seventh paragraph and substitute the following:
We do not decide that question here. While KPG has
offered a marked copy of a jury roster in a supplemental
transcript, the markings on that roster do not match the
roster’s legend sufficiently to support KPG’s claim that
it exhausted all its peremptory challenges. As such, the
record is insufficient to support its assignment of error
even if we found merit to KPG’s legal premise.
The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified.
Former opinion modified.
Motion for rehearing overruled.
Miller-Lerman, J., not participating.