Disputed facts in court
Perry v. Bottlinger
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- DeTron L. Perry asked the Supreme Court to review his claims that Nebraska courts mishandled disputed facts, evidence, judicial notice, and appellate review in his case against Jason B.
- Who it affects
- The Supreme Court proceeding is over, but the Court did not resolve Perry's claims about how Nebraska courts handled his case.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
Bottlinger and others. The Court refused to hear the case (denied Perry’s petition) and did not decide whether his claims were correct.
Perry's request asked the Supreme Court to review a case from the Nebraska Court of Appeals.
Question presented
1. Whether courts violate due process by affirming summary judgment where disputed material facts are resolved against the nonmovant, contrary to this Court’s precedents. 2. Whether courts exceed the limits of judicial notice by relying on prior proceedings to resolve contested issues central to liability. 3. Whether due process is violated when courts exclude or disregard critical evidence and witnesses, then grant summary judgment based on an incomplete record. 4. Whether appellate courts deny meaningful review by: a. Refusing oral argument, and b. Issuing summary affirmances and rehearing denials without addressing substantial federal questions.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.