State ex rel. Combs v. O'Neal
Nebraska Court of Appeals
662 N.W.2d 231 (2003)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
Ronda Combs and her daughter Brittanae Combs lived with Ronetta McKinney. Ronda died when Brittanae was 19 months old. Brittanae remained in McKinney’s home, and McKinney assumed full responsibility for Brittanae’s care. Brittanae flourished, becoming a successful student who was active in church and had many friends. McKinney was appointed Brittanae’s legal guardian when Brittanae was eight years old. Brittanae’s biological father, Adrian O’Neal (plaintiff), maintained a relationship with Brittanae from birth. However, that relationship consisted only of monthly contact with Brittanae and periodic gifts of clothes. O’Neal did not pay child support but claimed he told McKinney to inform him of Brittanae’s needs. When Brittanae was nine, a county court entered a paternity decree establishing O’Neal as Brittanae’s legal father and requiring him to pay child support. Two years later, O’Neal petitioned to modify the decree, seeking custody of Brittanae. At trial, then 13-year-old Brittanae testified that she had always lived with McKinney, referred to McKinney as mom, and wanted to stay with McKinney because of the pair’s close bond. The trial court concluded that although McKinney and O’Neal were both fit for custody, Brittanae should remain with McKinney. It awarded O’Neal only visitation rights. O’Neal appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 905,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,100 briefs, keyed to 995 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.

