Monthly Archives: October 2009

White Robes and Black Robes: The Nebraska Supreme Court’s Vacatur in State v. Henderson

By Daniel J. Hassing[0]

Oftentimes in the law, the outcome in a case is determined by what has previously happened procedurally.  Sometimes, the simple, common sense result is precluded because of the procedural posture of a dispute.  But this bizarre result stands because the procedural requirements are part of the rule of law upon which our society is based.  The Nebraska Supreme Court’s review of an arbitration award in State v. Henderson[1] presented just such a case in which the procedural background should have foreclosed the common sense outcome.  However, the court, by vastly expanding a narrow exception, was able to achieve the necessary outcome.

Posted in Commentaries, General Commentaries, Student Commentaries | Leave a comment