State v. Parker -- supplemental opinion

testimony on the issue of causation, which testimony was
required to overcome summary judgment. We therefore affirm
the decision of the district court.
A ffirmed.
G errArd and miller-lermAn, JJ., not participating.
StAte of nebrASkA, Appellee , v. Steven pArker , AppellAnt.
767 N.W.2d 68
Filed January 2, 2009. 	No. S-06-1442.
SupplementAl opinion
Appeal from the District Court for Sarpy County: dAvid
k. A rterburn, Judge. Supplemental opinion: Former opinion
modified. Motion for rehearing overruled.
Robert B. Creager, of Anderson, Creager & Wittstruck, P.C.,
for appellant.
Jon Bruning, Attorney General, and James D. Smith for
appellee.
H eAvicAn, 	c.J., 	WriGHt, 	connolly, 	G errArd, 	StepHAn,
mccormAck , and miller-lermAn, JJ.
per curiAm.
This matter is before the court on the motion for rehearing
filed by the State of Nebraska, appellee, regarding our opinion
reported at State v. Parker, ante p. 661, 757 N.W.2d 7 (2008).
We overrule the motion, but modify the opinion as follows:
1. 	That 	portion 	of 	the 	opinion 	designated 	“H eArSAy
obJection,” id. at 675-77, 757 N.W.2d at 19-20, is withdrawn,
and the following language is substituted in its place: “Because
of this disposition, we do not reach Parker’s remaining assign-
ments of error.”
2. The concurring opinion, id. at 677-78, 757 N.W.2d at 21,
is withdrawn.
The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified.
former opinion modified.
motion for reHeArinG overruled.
STATe v.PAR keR 	965
Cite as 276 Neb. 965
Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library
www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/
11/01/2026 04:53 AM CST