Reeder v. Reeder
Nebraska Supreme Court
217 Neb. 120, 348 N.W.2d 832 (1984)
- Written by Sheryl McGrath, JD
Facts
Theodore Reeder (Theodore) owned a home in Omaha, Nebraska. In 1979, Theodore moved to Texas but still owned the Omaha house. At the time, Theodore’s brother, Bernard, was building a home in Omaha. Bernard asked Theodore whether Bernard and his family could live in Theodore’s house until Bernard’s new home was complete. Theodore agreed. Bernard and his family—including Bernard’s daughter Dana—moved into Theodore’s house. Bernard did not pay rent to Theodore, but Bernard maintained the house and paid for the utilities. Theodore continued to pay the property tax on the house. In addition, Theodore and Bernard agreed that Theodore would leave the property insurance on the house in place. The property-insurance carrier was Cornhusker Casualty Company (Cornhusker) (plaintiff). Less than a year after Bernard and his family moved into Theodore’s house, a fire significantly damaged the house. The fire apparently started when Dana started a fire in the gas fireplace without opening the fireplace damper. Theodore submitted an insurance claim to Cornhusker. Cornhusker paid the claim and then filed a lawsuit naming Dana, Dana’s mother, and Bernard as defendants. The trial court dismissed the parents from the lawsuit. Dana then filed a motion for summary judgment. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of Dana. Cornhusker appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.