from web site


Rev. Stat. 84-917 (Reissue 1999). The Department submitted a motion to dismiss pursuant to Neb. Ct. R. of Pldg. in Civ. Actions 12(b)( 1) (rev. 2003). At Learn More Here on the Department's motion, the Department argued that Roubal's petition was not timely because it was not submitted within thirty days after service of the decision as needed by statute.
After examining the relevant statutory arrangements, the district court concluded that the filing of Roubal's petition on April 20, 2005, was untimely. The court as a result entered an order on June 22 giving the Department's movement to dismiss. Roubal consequently refined her appeal to this court. ASSIGNMENT OF mistake Roubal asserts that the district court erred in identifying that she did not submit her petition for evaluation in a prompt way.
Cummins Mgmt. v. Gilroy, 266 Neb. 635, 667 N.W. 2d 538 (2003 ). When a lower court lacks the authority to exercise its subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the benefits of a claim, concern, or concern, an appellate court likewise lacks the power to determine the benefits of the claim, issue, or question provided to the lower court.

ANALYSIS [3,4] We first examine 84-917, which offers in relevant part: (1) Anyone aggrieved by a decision in a contested case, whether such choice is affirmative or unfavorable in type, shall be entitled to judicial evaluation under the Administrative Procedure Act. Absolutely nothing in this area will be considered to prevent resort to other means of evaluation, redress, or relief supplied by law.
(Emphasis provided.) We also note that where a district court has statutory authority to review an action of an administrative firm, the district court may obtain jurisdiction just if the evaluation is sought in the mode and manner and within the time offered by statute. Essman v. Nebraska Police Training Ctr., 252 Neb.
Jefferson Cty. Bd. of Equal., 5 Neb. App. 781, 567 N.W. 2d 794 (1997 ). The filing of the petition and the service of summons are the two actions needed to establish the jurisdiction of the district court to review the decision of an administrative company under the Administrative Treatment Act.