Huffman v. Boersen

Background

An indigent man appealed a Nebraska court decision that annulled his marriage and dismissed his countersuit on paternity and child custody. Under a Nebraska law he was required to post $75 cash or bond to appeal, and the state court dismissed his appeal for failing to do so. After the Supreme Court granted review, Nebraska passed a law allowing people who swear they cannot pay to appeal without prepaying security, unless a trial judge certifies the appeal is not in good faith. At oral argument both sides’ lawyers agreed the new law applies and the respondent said the paternity claim has merit.

Reasoning

The Court vacated the Nebraska judgment and sent the case back to the Nebraska Supreme Court to decide the appeal again in light of the new state statute. The order did not resolve the underlying paternity or annulment questions; it instructed the state court to reconsider whether the appeal may proceed without the $75 security. Because counsel agreed the paternity issue had merit, the state court will be able to address that claim on further review.

Real world impact

People who cannot afford appeal costs in Nebraska may now have a path to appeal without posting cash or bond, subject to a judge’s finding that an appeal is not made in good faith. The vacated judgment reopens the annulment and the paternity and custody claim for further state-court consideration. The Supreme Court’s action is procedural, not a final ruling on the merits, so the outcome could still change on remand.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Douglas wrote separately that the case is controlled by the Court’s earlier decision in Boddie, which he said protects access to civil courts for people who cannot pay, including appeals. He emphasized that only the Nebraska Supreme Court can apply the new state law to this case and warned that denying an indigent’s appeal as frivolous could raise equal-protection concerns.