Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 25
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1030 (2026)

Garnishee; answer; controvert; allegations; liability; release

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

If the garnishee appears and answers and his or her disclosure is not satisfactory to the plaintiff, or if he or she fails to comply with the order of the court, by delivering the property and paying the money owing into court, or giving the undertaking required in section 25-1029, the plaintiff may file an application within twenty days for determination of the liability of the garnishee. The application may controvert the answer of the garnishee, or may allege facts showing the existence of indebtedness of the garnishee to the defendant or of the property and credits of the defendant in the hands of the garnishee. The answer of the garnishee, if one has been filed, and the application for determination of the liability of the garnishee shall constitute the pleadings upon which trial of the issue of the liability of the garnishee shall be had. If the plaintiff fails to file such application within twenty days, the garnishee shall be released and discharged.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1948–2023 · leading case: Huntington v. Pedersen, 883 N.W.2d 48 (Neb. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Huntington v. Pedersen, 883 N.W.2d 48 (Neb. 2016). · cites it 22× “In an order filed November 18, 2014, the district court determined that the appellants were seeking to garnish the $15,000 attorney fee in this second garnishment proceeding but that application of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1030 (Reissue 2008) precluded relief for the appellants.”
Torrison Ex Rel. Torrison v. Overman, 549 N.W.2d 124 (Neb. 1996). · cites it 24× “The Torrisons then filed in each case an "Application to Determine Garnishee Liability Pursuant to Neb.Rev. Stat. § 25-1030." The contents of this application are as follows: COMES [sic] NOW the Plaintiffs, Laura Torrison and Phil Torrison, next friends and parents of .”
NC + Hybrids v. Growers Seed Ass'n, 363 N.W.2d 362 (Neb. 1985). · cites it 15× “NC +, a corporation, appeals the judgment of the district court for Lancaster County releasing and discharging Steven Bruce Booker, on behalf of certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London, a garnishee, on account of NC + ’s failure to file an application for determination of…”
ML Manager v. Jensen, 287 Neb. 171 (Neb. 2014). · cites it 14× “NATURE OF CASE This is an appeal from an order overruling an “Objection to Garnishee’s Answers to Interrogatories” on the finding that the objection was filed after the 20-day time period set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1030 (Reissue 2008).”
Novak v. Novak, 508 N.W.2d 283 (Neb. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 15× “) The order of garnishment served on Property Investment contained this statutory language. When Linda learned that Property Investment had conveyed the property at 1112 Arbor Street to Novak & Sons, she chose the wrong remedy by attempting to determine garnishee liability under…”
Krohn v. Gardner, 471 N.W.2d 391 (Neb. 1991). · cites it 6× “BOSLAUGH, Justice, dissenting. There are several reasons why I believe the majority has reached an incorrect result in this case.”
NC + Hybrids v. Growers Seed Ass'n, 422 N.W.2d 542 (Neb. 1988). · cites it 7× “Because NC + failed to apply for a determination of Booker’s liability within 20 days after the garnishee’s answers to NC + ’s interrogatories, the district court discharged Booker from the garnishment proceedings.”
Novak v. Novak, 513 N.W.2d 303 (Neb. 1994). · cites it 4× “§ 25-1056 (Reissue 1989) instead of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1030 *369 (Reissue 1989), (2) holding that the issue of the IRA exemption must be remanded for further proceedings, and (3) determining that Gerald was in contempt of court.”
W. Smelting & Refining Co. v. First Nat'l Bank, 35 N.W.2d 116 (Neb. 1948). · cites it 6× “Plaintiff did not appeal therefrom, but some six months later filed its petition in the present action against defendant, First National Bank of Omaha, under sections 25-1030 and 25-1031, R. S. 1943, alleging that garnishee’s aforesaid “disclosures were not satisfactory to the…”
Florence Lake Investments v. Berg, 978 N.W.2d 308 (Neb. 2022). · cites it 3× “Unsatisfied with Zoetis’ answer regarding the 401K account, Florence filed an application to determine garnishee liability against Zoetis under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1030 (Reissue 2016).”
Myers v. Christensen, 776 N.W.2d 201 (Neb. 2009). · cites it 2× “[7] Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1030 (Reissue 2008). [8] Neb.”
Spaghetti Ltd. P'ship v. Wolfe, 647 N.W.2d 615 (Neb. 2002). “§ 25-1030. See Torrison, supra. In this case, the district court hearing on Spaghetti’s application to determine Hockenbergs’ liability constituted the trial of garnishment liability, as prescribed by statute.”
Show all 17 citing cases →
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.