Parker v. Lancaster County School Dist. No. 001

CourtSupreme Court of Nebraska
Citation254 Neb. 754,579 N.W.2d 526
Docket NumberNo. S-97-131,S-97-131
PartiesGertrude PARKER, Appellant, v. LANCASTER COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 001, also known as Lincoln Public Schools, et al., Appellees.
Decision Date12 June 1998

Page 526

579 N.W.2d 526
254 Neb. 754
Gertrude PARKER, Appellant,
v.
LANCASTER COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 001, also known as Lincoln Public Schools, et al., Appellees.
No. S-97-131.
Supreme Court of Nebraska.
June 12, 1998.

Page 527

Syllabus by the Court

1. Demurrer: Pleadings. In considering a demurrer, a court must assume that the facts pled, as distinguished from legal conclusions, are true as alleged and must give the pleading the benefit of any reasonable inference from the facts alleged, but cannot [254 Neb. 755] assume the existence of facts not alleged, make factual findings to aid the pleading, or consider evidence which might be adduced at trial.

2. Negligence: Contracts: Contractors and Subcontractors: Damages: Liability. Under the accepted work doctrine, a construction contractor is not liable for injuries or damage to a third person with whom he is not in contractual relation resulting from the negligent performance of his duty under his contract with the contractee where the injury or damage is sustained after the work is completed and accepted by the owner.

3. Negligence: Contractors and Subcontractors. An exception to the accepted work doctrine exists in situations where the parties dealt with inherently dangerous elements or the defect at issue was latent and could not have been discovered by the owner or employer.

4. Negligence. Generally, stairs, steps, and unmarked curbs are not inherently dangerous.

5. Judgments: Demurrer: Appeal and Error. An order sustaining a demurrer will be affirmed if any one of the grounds on which it was asserted is well taken.

William A. Wieland, of Healey Wieland Law Firm, Lincoln, for appellant.

Terry R. Wittler, of Cline, Williams, Wright, Johnson & Oldfather, Lincoln, for appellees Architectural Partnership, P.C., and Architectural Partnership, Inc.

WHITE, C.J., CAPORALE, CONNOLLY, GERRARD, STEPHAN, and McCORMACK, JJ., and BLUE, District Judge, Retired.

CONNOLLY, Justice.

The district court for Lancaster County sustained a demurrer to the appellant's amended petition on the bases that the amended petition failed to state a claim and that the causes of action were misjoined. The appellant stood on the amended petition, and the district court dismissed the lawsuit. We affirm.

BACKGROUND

The appellant, Gertrude Parker, filed an amended petition alleging that while an invitee, she was injured on October 1, 1995, when she fell in the entryway to the dining room of the Hulda Roper School, an elementary school that is a part of Lancaster County School District No. 001, also known as Lincoln Public Schools (LPS). Parker filed suit against the appellees, The Architectural Partnership, P.C., and The [254 Neb. 756] Architectural Partnership, Inc. (collectively partnership), and LPS, alleging that her fall was caused by an unmarked and unguarded ramp or floor riser in the entryway to the dining room. In her amended petition, Parker stated that LPS is a political subdivision and that an action under the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act had been filed against LPS. However, the amended petition then stated that "LPS will be served with summons upon the denial of [Parker's] claim or inaction on [Parker's] claim and upon further amendment to the allegations...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Gordon v. Community First State Bank
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • December 4, 1998
    ...sustaining a demurrer will be affirmed if any one of the grounds on which it was asserted is well taken. Parker v. Lancaster Cty. Sch. Dist. No. 001, 254 Neb. 754, 579 N.W.2d 526 (1998); Lawry v. County of Sarpy, 254 Neb. 193, 575 N.W.2d 605 In considering a demurrer, a court must assume th......
  • Moglia v. McNeil Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • July 22, 2005
    ...work doctrine" in construction cases. See, Dvorak v. Bunge Corp., 256 Neb. 341, 590 N.W.2d 682 (1999); Parker v. Lancaster Cty. Sch. Dist. No. 001, 254 Neb. 754, 579 N.W.2d 526 (1998). We stated in Parker: The general rule is that a construction contractor is not liable for injuries or dama......
  • Sundermann v. Hy-Vee, Inc.
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • August 14, 2020
    ...tapered curb outside entrance to medical center presents ordinary risk, not unreasonable risk); Parker v. Lancaster Cty. Sch. Dist. No. 001 , 254 Neb. 754, 579 N.W.2d 526 (1998) (find as general rule that stairs, steps, and unmarked curbs present common risks and are not inherently dangerou......
  • Washington v. Qwest Communications Corp., S-04-677.
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • October 14, 2005
    ...facts of this case and that the trial court erred in instructing the jury as to the doctrine. In Parker v. Lancaster Cty. Sch. Dist. No. 001, 254 Neb. 754, 757, 579 N.W.2d 526, 528 (1998), we stated: The general rule is that a construction contractor is not liable for injuries or damage to ......
  • 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