Interest of C.D.A., In re, 88-468

Decision Date17 February 1989
Docket NumberNo. 88-468,88-468
Citation435 N.W.2d 681,231 Neb. 267
PartiesIn re Interest of C.D.A., A Child under 18 years of age. STATE of Nebraska, Appellee, v. R.E.A., Appellant, R.A.A., Appellee.
CourtNebraska Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court

1. Jurisdiction: Final Orders: Appeal and Error. In the absence of a judgment or final order in the court from which an appeal is taken, this court acquires no jurisdiction.

2. Final Orders: Appeal and Error. A ruling refusing to permit the withdrawal of an answer of no contest filed pursuant to the provisions of Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-279.01 (Reissue 1988) is not a final, appealable order.

Richard Douglas McClain, Lincoln, for appellant.

Robert M. Spire, Atty. Gen., and Melanie J. Whittamore, for appellee.

BOSLAUGH, CAPORALE, SHANAHAN and GRANT, JJ., and CARLSON, District Judge.

CAPORALE, Justice.

R.E.A., the father of infant girl C.D.A., purports to appeal from the denial of a new trial on the order of the separate juvenile court overruling his motion to withdraw the answer of no contest he, pursuant to Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-279.01(2) (Reissue 1988), entered at the adjudication hearing. Lacking jurisdiction, we dismiss.

Following the hearing at which the father entered the aforesaid answer, the juvenile court, on February 22, 1988, determined the infant to be a child within the purview of Neb.Rev.Stat. § 43-247(3)(a) (Reissue 1988) and committed temporary legal custody over her to the Department of Social Services. On March 24, 1988, the father moved to withdraw his no-contest answer. That motion was overruled on March 28. On April 6, the father filed a motion for a new trial, which he amended the next day. On May 5, the court below overruled both of those motions. On May 10, the father filed a pleading seeking once again to withdraw his no-contest answer "and/or" a new trial. These requests were denied by the juvenile court on May 16. On May 27, the father filed a notice purporting to appeal from the orders entered March 28, 1988, May 5, 1988, and May 16, 1988.

In the absence of a judgment or final order in the court from which an appeal is taken, this court acquires no jurisdiction. Gruenewald v. Waara, 229 Neb. 619, 428 N.W.2d 210 (1988); Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1911 (Reissue 1985); Neb.Ct.R. of Prac. 4A(1) b (rev.1988). Without engaging in an analysis of the significance, if any, of the pleading the father filed on May 10, 1988, it is clear he seeks to appeal not from the February 22, 1988, adjudication, which is a final, appealable order, In re Interest of Z.R., 226 Neb. 770, 415 N.W.2d 128 (1987), but from the various orders relating to the withdrawal of his no-contest answer. Because a juvenile court's ruling on a motion to withdraw a no-contest answer...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Interest of R.G., In re
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • June 14, 1991
    ...participate in psychological therapy and also requiring the department to pay for such therapy was a final order. In re Interest of C.D.A., 231 Neb. 267, 435 N.W.2d 681 (1989), held that an order refusing to permit the withdrawal of an answer of no contest entered at an adjudication hearing......
  • Schaad v. Simms
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • May 29, 1992
    ...judgment or final order in the court from which an appeal is taken, an appellate court acquires no jurisdiction. In re Interest of C.D.A., 231 Neb. 267, 435 N.W.2d 681 (1989); Gruenewald v. Waara, 229 Neb. 619, 428 N.W.2d 210 (1988); W & K Farms v. Hi-Line Farms, 226 Neb. 895, 416 N.W.2d 10......
  • Interest of C.D.C., In re, 89-871
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • May 25, 1990
    ...failed to remove or protect the child from such an environment. That adjudication being a final appealable order, In re Interest of C.D.A., 231 Neb. 267, 435 N.W.2d 681 (1989), from which neither parent appealed, the parents may not now question the existence of the facts on which the juven......
  • Interest of M.B., In re
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • September 15, 1989
    ...to concern ourselves with the facts under which the juvenile court asserted jurisdiction over the children. See In re Interest of C.D.A., 231 Neb. 267, 435 N.W.2d 681 (1989). Moreover, in view of the nature of the claimed error, it would not serve any useful purpose to detail the evidence w......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT