Who We Are

Our Lawyers

Meet the lawyers who will be working on your case. With more than 50 years of collective experience, we have much to offer you, including awards, accolades and nominations that cannot be matched.

Our Lawyers

Case Results

Mondelli v. Kendel Homes Corp.

With regard to the Mondellis' appeal, we conclude that the district court abused its discretion in excluding the testimony of Drs. Pour and King. This exclusion of evidence was prejudicial error. The district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to allow joinder of the claims of the Mondelli family.

In The News

Our Lawyers
in the Media

At Domina Law Group we are fortunate to work on fascinating and compelling legal problems and lawsuits that change laws and affect our country – Media across the US and across the borders agree. Read stories and watch videos of our cases and with our lawyers.

Attorney Referrals

Our firm has a reputation as leaders in complex litigation.

Get the best result possible by partnering with us.

Our legal skills have been utilized in some of the most specialized and complicated cases. These cases were often referred to us by other professionals in the field. We honor and respect lawyers and other professionals who choose to refer complex cases to our law firm.

We have paid millions in fees to our co-counsel. Call us.

Contact Us

Contact Us Today

Send Your Message

"Trial is legal surgery, the narrowest specialty, and it requires unique skills. Our clients want our service and hope they never need it again- like surgery."

Domina Law Group Select "Changing the Law" Cases

Every lawyer is proud of making contributions changing the law in favorable ways. Domina Law Group pc llo’s extensive trial and appellate practice has permitted our lawyers to present novel legal questions, and compelled judicial resolution of those questions in areas that have significantly changed the law. Our efforts in this regard range from:

  • A prominent contribution to a dialog leading to congressional hearings and regulatory changes affecting agricultural markets
  • A state supreme court decision declaring an entire component of a state’s overall tax structure, its property tax affecting and funding political subdivisions, unconstitutional and requiring the legislature to return to the legislative process and correct its mistakes
  • Adoption of new standards for the presentation of expert testimony
  • Declaration that implied warranties of fitness and merchantability do not require transactions between parties in privity with one another
  • Establishment of standards of conduct for corporate directors and officers, and methods for their judicial removal from office
  • The impeachment of a constitutional officer and the indictment of another on articles of impeachment with a resulting state supreme court vote of four for impeachment, three for acquittal, resulting in the officer’s retention of office under a state constitution standing requiring five votes to impeach
  • Service as amicus curiae counsel for a large coalition of a public interest groups representing nearly one in six Americans in an important food safety litigation

Some examples of Domina Law Group pc llo cases involving changes in the law, large and small, appear below:

Bauermeister v. Waste Management of Nebraska
03/06/15

DMK Biodiesel v. McCoy
285 Neb 974 (2013)

Babel v. Schmidt
17 Neb. App 400, 765 N.W.2d 227 (2009)
(extending riparian property rights to owners of islands)

Bellino v. McGrath North
274 Neb. 130, 738 N.W.2d 434 (2007)
(legal malpractice)

Crowley v. McCoy
234 Neb. 88, 449 N.W.2d 221(1989)
(declaring non-recourse real estate sales contracts enforceable)

Frank v. Lockwood
275 Neb. 735, 749 N.W.2d 443 (2008)
(measure of damages for accountant malpractice arising from income tax return preparation)

Gilbert M. and Martha H. Hitchcock Foundation v. Kountze
272 Neb. 251, 720 N.W.2d 31 (2006)
(jurisdiction in cases involving charitable foundation)

Kraft v. St. John Lutheran Church of Seward
Neb., 414 F.3d 943, 67 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 940 (8th Cir. 2005)

Koch v. Cedar Co Freeholder Board
276 Neb. 1009, 759 N.W.2d 464 (2009)
(school consolidation)

Neiman v. Tri-R Angus Ranch
274 Neb. 252, 739 N.W.2d 182 (2007)
(standard of proof for involuntary removal of corporate direction)

Peterson v. North American Plant Breeders
218 Neb. 258, 354 N.W.2d 625 (1984)
(holding privity of contract is not required for implied warranties of merchantability to be enforceable)

Racicky v. Farmland Industries
328 F.3d 389, 33 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,190, 61 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 318 (2003)
(measure of damages in dairy loss cases)

Roth v. Wiese
271 Neb. 750, 716 N.W.2d 419 (2006)
(defining tort of outrage’s elements)

Schafersman v. Agland Coop
262 Neb. 215, 631 N.W.2d 862 (2001)
(adopting new standards for expert testimony)

We Are Dedicated to Being Omaha Trial Lawyers

  • We Create Solutions
  • We Respect The Process
  • We Trust Juries
  • We Make a Difference

How Can We Help You?

Tell us about your case.

Send Your Message