Nebraska Revised Statutes
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 23-336 (2026)
County contracts; when invalid
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
All contracts, either express or implied, entered into with any county board, for or on behalf of any county, and all orders given by any such board or any of the members thereof, for any article, service, public improvement, material or labor in contravention of any statutory limitation, or when there are or were no funds legally available therefor, or in the absence of a statute expressly authorizing such contract to be entered into, or such order to be given, are hereby declared unlawful and shall be wholly void as an obligation against any such county.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1957–1985 · leading case: CAPITAL BRIDGE Co. v. Cnty. of Saunders, 83 N.W.2d 18 (Neb. 1957).
CAPITAL BRIDGE Co. v. Cnty. of Saunders, 83 N.W.2d 18 (Neb. 1957). “It is contended that the contracts in the present case were not only void but that the obligation thereof is voided by virtue of sections 23-336, 23-337, and 23-338, R.R.”
Anderson v. Peterson, 375 N.W.2d 901 (Neb. 1985). “Anderson, for benefit of the county, sought damages from the board members under the provisions of two statutes, namely, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 23-336 (Reissue 1983): “All contracts .”
Thiles v. Cnty. Bd. of Sarpy Cnty., 200 N.W.2d 13 (Neb. 1972). “Intervener argues the contract in question is void because not expressly authorized by statute, citing section 23-336, R. R. S. 1943. This contention overlaps the first assignment of error, and it has been determined that the Sarpy County board of commissioners did not exceed…”
State ex rel. Schuler v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 316 N.W.2d 302 (Neb. 1982). “Relator, a resident and taxpayer of Loup County, Nebraska, brought an action in the District Court for Loup County under the authority of Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 23-336 and 23-337 (Reissue 1977) to recover from the respondents, the three elected commissioners of Loup County, certain…”
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.