State ex rel. Parks v. The Council of the City of Omaha
Nebraska Supreme Court
277 Neb. 919, 766 N.W.2d 134 (2009)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
In 2000, the city council of Omaha (defendant) passed a law (section 25-9) that established and provided for the funding of a public-safety auditor. The auditor was to be responsible for reviewing public complaints about police officers or firefighters. After the initial year of funding for the position, subsequent funding for the auditor was to be accomplished through “appropriated funds in the normal city budgeting process similar to other city departments.” The city employed an auditor for a few years, until November 2006. Thereafter, the city council did not appropriate funds for the auditor position. Charles Parks and another Omaha citizens (collectively, Parks) (plaintiffs) sued the city council, seeking a writ of mandamus to command the city council to hire and appropriate funds for an auditor. The trial court denied writ relief. Parks appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gerrard, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 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.