1. Necessary parties
1. Necessary parties
The participation of a statutorily mandated necessary party in a declaratory judgment action involving the validity of a city ordinance is a jurisdictional requirement, and the failure to include such party requires vacation of a district court's judgment in the action. Dunn v. Daub, 259 Neb. 559, 611 N.W.2d 97 (2000).
A party is not permitted to first obtain a judgment and then apply the requirements of this section in order to determine who is a necessary party to an action. Taylor Oil Co., Inc. v. Retikis, 254 Neb. 275, 575 N.W.2d 870 (1998).
Judgment creditors or persons injured in automobile accidents are interested parties in declaratory judgment action between insured and insurance company as to validity of policy; thus, declaratory judgment was not available, and subsequent granting of motion for summary judgment based on res judicata effect of original declaratory judgment order was error. Krohn v. Gardner, 238 Neb. 460, 471 N.W.2d 391 (1991).
In a taxpayer's action, potentially all of the taxpayers and citizens are parties; but the fact that all taxpayers may be potential parties does not mean that they are indispensable parties. There is no requirement that all taxpayers who might be affected in some manner by the result of the litigation be made parties to the action. Christensen v. City of Tekamah, 230 Neb. 576, 432 N.W.2d 798 (1988).
The statute authorizing a declaratory judgment action is applicable only where all interested persons are made parties to the proceeding. Omaha Pub. Power Dist. v. Nuclear Elec. Ins. Ltd., 229 Neb. 740, 428 N.W.2d 895 (1988).
"Indispensable party" to a suit is defined as one who must have such an interest in the controversy as to preclude a final decree without affecting such party's interests. Shepoka v. Knopik, 197 Neb. 651, 250 N.W.2d 619 (1977).
All necessary persons must be parties to action at time court enters declaratory judgment. Baker v. A. C. Nelson Co., 185 Neb. 128, 174 N.W.2d 197 (1970).
Action should be dismissed without prejudice when there is an absence of necessary parties. Marsh v. Marsh, 173 Neb. 282, 113 N.W.2d 323 (1962).
Joinder of all necessary parties defendant is required. Haynes v. Anderson, 163 Neb. 50, 77 N.W.2d 674 (1956).
State was not a necessary party to suit to enjoin tax. Offutt Housing Co. v. County of Sarpy, 160 Neb. 320, 70 N.W.2d 382 (1955).
In controversy between store operator and city over validity of ordinance, other store owners were not necessary parties. City of Omaha v. Lewis & Smith Drug Co., Inc., 156 Neb. 650, 57 N.W.2d 269 (1953).
Whenever all necessary parties have not been impleaded, action should be dismissed. Stahl v. Allchin, 155 Neb. 412, 52 N.W.2d 251 (1952).
Duty is imposed upon plaintiff of joining all persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected by the judgment. Redick v. Peony Park, 151 Neb. 442, 37 N.W.2d 801 (1949).
This section applies only to actions for declaratory relief. State v. Kelley, 249 Neb. 99, 541 N.W.2d 645 (1996).
The requirement that the Attorney General be served with a copy of the proceeding when the constitutionality of an ordinance is raised is a prerequisite to the exercise of the district court's jurisdiction. Absent compliance with this section, a district court may not exercise its jurisdiction. DeCoste v. City of Wahoo, 248 Neb. 463, 534 N.W.2d 760 (1995).
Petition seeking declaration that residency requirement for dissolution of marriage was unconstitutional dismissed upon demurrer of Attorney General. Ashley v. Ashley, 191 Neb. 824, 217 N.W.2d 926 (1974).
Where constitutionality of statute is involved, Attorney General should be served with copies of the proceedings. Metropolitan Utilities Dist. v. City of Omaha, 171 Neb. 609, 107 N.W.2d 397 (1961).
Requisites for maintenance of declaratory judgment proceedings are stated. Graham v. Beauchamp, 154 Neb. 889, 50 N.W.2d 104 (1951).