Stromsburg Bank v. Nuttelman

Decision Date30 November 1984
Docket NumberNo. 83-908,83-908
Citation218 Neb. 687,358 N.W.2d 746
PartiesThe STROMSBURG BANK, Stromsburg, Nebraska, a corporation, Appellee, v. Roy NUTTELMAN et al., Appellants, Dennis Nuttelman et al., Appellees.
CourtNebraska Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court

1. Records: Evidence. A bill of exceptions is the only vehicle for bringing evidence to this court.

2. Summary Judgment: Records: Presumptions: Appeal and Error. Where a summary judgment has been entered, the absence of a bill of exceptions results in the presumptions that the evidence sustains the trial court's finding that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the case was correctly decided.

3. Summary Judgment: Records: Appeal and Error. In the absence of a bill of exceptions, the only issue which will be considered on appeal of a summary judgment is the sufficiency of the pleadings to support the judgment.

4. Summary Judgment. Summary judgment is an extreme remedy which may properly be granted only where there exists no genuine issue as to any material fact, the ultimate inferences to be drawn from those facts are clear, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Roy Nuttelman and Cecilia Nuttelman, pro se.

James E. Papik of Mills Law Offices, Osceola, for appellee Stromsburg Bank.

BOSLAUGH, HASTINGS, CAPORALE, and GRANT, JJ., and COLWELL, District Judge, Retired.

CAPORALE, Justice.

Plaintiff-appellee, The Stromsburg Bank, brought an action against the defendants-appellants, Roy Nuttelman and his wife, Cecilia Nuttelman, and others having an interest in certain real estate, seeking to set aside its conveyance by the Nuttelmans and a subsequent mortgage thereof on the ground that the transactions were fraudulent as to the bank. Following the entry of a summary judgment in the bank's favor, the Nuttelmans filed a notice of appeal to this court. We affirm.

The judgment recites that evidence was adduced at the hearing had on the bank's motion for summary judgment. Based upon that evidence, the trial court specifically found that no genuine issues of material fact existed and that the bank was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. It accordingly found, ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the conveyance and mortgage in question were each fraudulent as to the bank, and each of them was set aside as null and void. The trial court then declared the real estate subject to execution for the satisfaction of a judgment previously obtained by the bank against Roy Nuttelman in another case.

No bill of exceptions containing the proceedings had on the bank's motion for summary judgment has been filed. The absence of a bill of exceptions, it being the only vehicle for bringing evidence to this court,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Witherspoon v. Sides Const. Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • February 1, 1985
    ...v. Curtiss, 219 Neb. 106, 361 N.W.2d 508 (1985); Gilbreath v. Ridgeway, 218 Neb. 822, 360 N.W.2d 474 (1984); Stromsburg Bank v. Nuttelman, 218 Neb. 687, 358 N.W.2d 746 (1984); Straub v. American Bowling Congress, 218 Neb. 241, 353 N.W.2d 11 (1984); Galyen Petroleum Co. v. Hixson, 213 Neb. 6......
  • Hogan v. Garden County
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • June 21, 2002
    ...if they are sufficient to support the judgment, we will not reverse the district court's decision. See, id.; Stromsburg Bank v. Nuttelman, 218 Neb. 687, 358 N.W.2d 746 (1984). In Hogan's petition seeking the payment of salary and benefits, he alleged, inter alia, that as Garden County Attor......
  • Yankton Production Credit Ass'n v. Larsen
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • April 5, 1985
    ...v. Curtiss, 219 Neb. 106, 361 N.W.2d 508 (1985); Gilbreath v. Ridgeway, 218 Neb. 822, 360 N.W.2d 474 (1984); Stromsburg Bank v. Nuttelman, 218 Neb. 687, 358 N.W.2d 746 (1984); Mutual Benefit Life Ins. Co. v. Chisholm, 213 Neb. 301, 329 N.W.2d 103 (1983). Upon a motion for summary judgment t......
  • Krul v. Harless
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • March 28, 1986
    ...clear, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1332 (Reissue 1979); Stromsburg Bank v. Nuttelman, 218 Neb. 687, 358 N.W.2d 746 (1984). In considering a motion for summary judgment, a court must view the evidence most favorably to the party against......
  • 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