Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom

35 Citing cases

  1. Noland v. Yost

    315 Neb. 568 (Neb. 2023)   Cited 8 times

    Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom, 239 Neb. 579, 477 N.W.2d 8 (1991), disapproved on other grounds, Windham v. Griffin, 295 Neb. 279, 887 N.W.2d 710 (2016).

  2. Weinand v. Weinand

    260 Neb. 146 (Neb. 2000)   Cited 23 times
    Noting Parenting Act's definitions provide guidance regarding parental rights and duties considered important by Legislature

    We have previously decided that a district court in a dissolution action, acting pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-364 (Reissue 1998), has jurisdiction to grant rights of visitation to an ex-stepparent when that ex-stepparent establishes that during the marriage, he or she acted as a parent to the stepchild. Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom, 239 Neb. 579, 477 N.W.2d 8 (1991). It is undisputed that Mark acted as a parent to Nicole during his marriage to Debra and is, therefore, entitled to seek visitation.

  3. State ex rel. Hopkins v. Batt

    253 Neb. 852 (Neb. 1998)   Cited 48 times
    Prenotice-pleading case in which court found remedy in § 43-512.03 not applicable because there was no allegation child had received or was eligible to receive public assistance benefits

    In the absence of a biological relationship between a husband and his wife's child, the husband may acquire certain rights and responsibilities when he elects to stand in loco parentis to the child. See, Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom, 239 Neb. 579, 477 N.W.2d 8 (1991); Austin v. Austin, 147 Neb. 109, 22 N.W.2d 560 (1946). We have stated:

  4. Stuhr v. Stuhr

    240 Neb. 239 (Neb. 1992)   Cited 33 times
    Holding fit biological or adoptive parent has superior right to custody of child over a nonbiological or nonadoptive parent because of constitutionally protected parent-child relationship

    As we have stated repeatedly: "[P]arties in a proceeding to dissolve a marriage cannot control the disposition of minor children by agreement." Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom, 239 Neb. 579, 582, 477 N.W.2d 8, 11 (1991). Accord, Hicks v. Hicks, 223 Neb. 189, 388 N.W.2d 510 (1986); Eliker v. Eliker, 206 Neb. 764, 295 N.W.2d 268 (1980); Koser v. Koser, 148 Neb. 277, 27 N.W.2d 162 (1947).

  5. Quintela v. Quintela

    4 Neb. App. 396 (Neb. Ct. App. 1996)   Cited 9 times
    Applying restatement in context of paternity

    In the absence of a biological or adoptive relationship between a husband and his wife's child, the Nebraska Supreme Court and this court have recognized that certain rights and responsibilities may arise where a husband elects to stand in loco parentis to his wife's child. See, Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom, 239 Neb. 579, 477 N.W.2d 8 (1991); Austin v. Austin, 147 Neb. 109, 22 N.W.2d 560 (1946); Cavanaugh v. deBaudiniere, supra. The Nebraska Supreme Court has held:

  6. Beal v. Endsley

    3 Neb. App. 589 (Neb. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 6 times
    In Beal v. Endsley, 3 Neb. App. 589, 529 N.W.2d 125 (1995), this court discussed whether a noncustodial parent must be made a party to grandparent visitation proceedings in the context of both parents’ right to due process.

    Rosse v. Rosse, 244 Neb. 967, 510 N.W.2d 73 (1994); Dice v. Dice, 1 Neb. App. 241, 493 N.W.2d 207 (1992). See, also, Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom, 239 Neb. 579, 477 N.W.2d 8 (1991). DISCUSSION

  7. Windham v. Griffin

    295 Neb. 279 (Neb. 2016)   Cited 19 times
    In Windham, we rejected the nonparent’s invitation to "examine the merits as though [the parent and nonparent] were standing on equal footing and the outcome would be determined only by reference to best interests."

    We do not agree.Our reference to “same rights” goes back at least to Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom , 239 Neb. 579, 477 N.W.2d 8 (1991), which relied in part on Gribble v. Gribble , 583 P.2d 64 (Utah 1978). In Gribble , the Supreme Court of Utah based a stepparent's standing to seek visitation upon an interpretation of a Utah divorce statute, then codified as Utah Code Ann. § 30-3-5 (1953).

  8. Silvija P. v. Eric L. (In re Guardianship of Brydon P.)

    286 Neb. 661 (Neb. 2013)   Cited 19 times

    Latham, supra note 16. See Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom, 239 Neb. 579, 477 N.W.2d 8 (1991).“[W]hile it is presumed that a child's best interest is served by maintaining the family's privacy and autonomy, that presumption must give way where the child has established strong psychological bonds with a person who, although not a biological parent, has lived with the child and provided care, nurture, and affection, assuming in the child's eye a stature like that of a parent.

  9. Latham v. Schwerdtfeger

    282 Neb. 121 (Neb. 2011)   Cited 21 times
    In Latham v. Schwerdtfeger, 282 Neb. 121, 802 N.W.2d 66 (2011), the Nebraska Supreme Court applied the in loco parentis doctrine in a custody dispute involving unmarried domestic partners who had separated.

    Weinand v. Weinand, 260 Neb. 146, 152–53, 616 N.W.2d 1, 6 (2000) (emphasis omitted). In Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom, 239 Neb. 579, 477 N.W.2d 8 (1991), we determined that the doctrine of in loco parentis, although not enumerated in the statutes, is a proper consideration when determining stepparent visitation with due consideration to the best interests of the child.

  10. Shearer v. Shearer

    270 Neb. 178 (Neb. 2005)   Cited 16 times
    Stating that parties are bound by stipulations voluntarily made and that relief from such stipulations is warranted only under exceptional circumstances

    Pursuant to § 42-366, upon marital separation, parties may enter into a written agreement for the disposition of their property, and the terms of such an agreement are binding on the court unless found to be unconscionable. Parties are bound by stipulations that are voluntarily made, and relief from such stipulations is warranted only under exceptional circumstances. Hickenbottom v. Hickenbottom, 239 Neb. 579, 477 N.W.2d 8 (1991). In this case, the parties entered into the stipulation and agreement, in which they agreed upon the disposition of all of their property except Dallas' tier II benefits.