Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 14-406 (2026)

Building zones; nonconforming use; continuance authorized; changes

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The lawful use of land existing on April 1, 1925, although such use does not conform to sections 14-401 to 14-418, may be continued, but if such nonconforming use is abandoned, any future use of such land shall be in conformity with sections 14-401 to 14-418. The lawful use of a building existing on April 1, 1925, may be continued, although such use does not conform with sections 14-401 to 14-418, and such use may be extended throughout the building, provided no structural alterations, except those required by law or ordinance, are made in such building. If no structural alterations are made, a nonconforming use of a building may be changed to another nonconforming use of the same or a higher classification. Whenever a use district shall be changed, any then existing nonconforming use in such changed district may be continued or changed to a use permitted in that district if all other regulations governing the new use are complied with. Whenever a nonconforming use of a building has been changed to a more restricted use or to a conforming use such use shall not thereafter be changed to a less restricted use.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1956–1994 · leading case: Wolf v. City of Omaha, 129 N.W.2d 501 (Neb. 1964).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Wolf v. City of Omaha, 129 N.W.2d 501 (Neb. 1964). · cites it 20× “ming use; that the plaintiffs were in operation and licensed for such breeding and raising of purebred dogs prior to the enactment of any regulating and prohibiting ordinance by the defendant; and that the Legislature, under the provisions of Chapter 14, article 4, of the…”

City of Omaha v. Gsantner, 77 N.W.2d 663 (Neb. 1956). · cites it 4× “Defendant by answer admitted the operation of the dog kennel and contended that it was a nonconforming and permitted use within the meaning of section 14-406, R. R. S. 1943. Trial was had.”

Cnty. of Dakota v. Worldwide Truck Parts & Metals, 511 N.W.2d 769 (Neb. 1994). · cites it 2× “In August 1989, the Dakota County Attorney filed this action, alleging that the use of the property was a nonconforming and nonpermitted use under Dakota County zoning ordinances and in violation of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 14-406 (Reissue 1991). Worldwide answered and asserted as…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.