NESCT reverses SJ for city in Recreational Land Liability Act

Iodence v. City of Alliance, 270 Neb. 59 Filed July 1, 2005. No. S-03-528.

Plaintiff brought suit against City of Alliance Nebraska for injuries she sustained when she ran over an obscured tree stump in park. Plaintiff went to park to view son's baseball game. The City won summary judgment because Court said the Recreational Land Liability Act applied, §§ 37-729 to 37-736 (Reissue 2004). The Supreme Court reversed the trial court holding that entering the park to watch a baseball game was not a “recreational purpose” as § 37-729(3) defines them. Accord Dykes v. Scotts Bluff Cty. Ag. Socy., 260 Neb. 375, 617 N.W.2d 817 (2000) {viewing of livestock exhibits at a county fair not a recreational purpose}. Chief Justice Hendry concurs but argues the Recreational Land Liability Act never should have applied to political subdivisions, as Watson v. City of Omaha, 209 Neb. 835, 312 N.W.2d 256 (1981) held. Justices Stephan and Miller-Lerman dissent arguing that the liability limitations of the Recreational Land Liability Act should apply to all recreational activities. .