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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1093 (2026)

Replevin; delivery of property; notice, when required

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

The plaintiff in an action to recover the possession of specific personal property may, at the commencement of the suit, or any time before answer, request the delivery of such property as provided by sections 25-1093 to 25-1098, 25-10,109, and 25-10,110. In a replevin action under the Grain Warehouse Act, notice shall be given as provided in section 88-547.02.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1979–2019 · leading case: Found. One Bank v. Svoboda, 303 Neb. 624 (Neb. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Found. One Bank v. Svoboda, 303 Neb. 624 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 4× “We affirm and, in so doing, reiterate that in a replevin case, a defendant or intervenor's general denial and assertion of ownership necessarily place the questions of possession, ownership, and damages before the jury under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1093 et seq. (Reissue 2016).”
Zelenka v. Pratte, 300 Neb. 100 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 2× “See, also, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1093 (Reissue 2016).”
Neujahr v. Neujahr, 393 N.W.2d 47 (Neb. 1986). · cites it 4× “If one of the parties has property which properly belongs to the other under the terms of the decree, then that individual may obtain possession of the property by filing a replevin action, see Neb.Rev.Stat. §§ 25-1093 and 25-10,110 (Reissue 1985), or by citing the other…”
Jacob v. Schlichtman, 622 N.W.2d 852 (Neb. 2001). · cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-1093 to 25-10,106 (Reissue 1995).”
Pinnacle Bank v. Darland Constr. Co., 709 N.W.2d 635 (Neb. 2006). “§§ 25-1093 and 25-10,110 (Reissue 1995 & Supp.”
United States v. Hughes Ranch, Inc., 33 F. Supp. 2d 1157 (D. Neb. 1999). · cites it 2× “I find and conclude that the government is entitled to enforce the mortgages and security interests unless the “unclean hands” defense has sufficient merit to withstand the government’s summary judgment motion. In particular, the following are undisputed: (1) promissory notes…”
Peck v. Augustin Bros. Co., 279 N.W.2d 397 (Neb. 1979). · cites it 2× “See §§ 25-1093 to 25-10,110, R. R. S. 1943 (Reissue 1975).”
Found. One Bank v. Svoboda, 303 Neb. 624 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 4× “We affirm and, in so doing, reiterate that in a replevin case, a defendant or intervenor’s general denial and assertion of ownership neces- sarily place the questions of possession, ownership, and dam- ages before the jury under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1093 et seq. (Reissue 2016).”
Zelenka v. Pratte, 300 Neb. 100 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 2× “See, also, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1093 (Reissue 2016).”
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.