Nebraska Revised Statutes
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1141 (2026)
Testimony; repetition of objections unnecessary
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Where an objection has once been made to the admission of testimony and overruled by the court it shall be unnecessary to repeat the same objection to further testimony of the same nature by the same witness in order to save the error, if any, in the ruling of the court whereby such testimony was received.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1945–2023 · leading case: State v. Pope, 305 Neb. 912 (Neb. 2020).
State v. Pope, 305 Neb. 912 (Neb. 2020). “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1141 (Reissue 2016) does not apply to testimony given by a different witness when no objec- tion is made to that witness’ testimony.”
State v. Cox, 437 N.W.2d 134 (Neb. 1989). “Without an express reference to the statute, as far as we can gather, Cox relies on Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1141 (Reissue 1985), which provides: Where an objection has once been made to the admission of testimony and overruled by the court it shall be unnecessary to repeat the same…”
State v. Howard, 921 N.W.2d 869 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018). “§ 25-1141 (Reissue 2016) to argue that his initial objection was sufficient to challenge all of the prosecutor's statements and that he was not required to repeatedly object to every statement he now challenges. We first note that Howard never objected to any statements made…”
State v. Elias, 990 N.W.2d 905 (Neb. 2023). “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1141 (Reissue 2016) provides: Where an objection has once been made to the admis- sion of testimony and overruled by the court it shall be unnecessary to repeat the same objection to further testi- mony of the same nature by the same witness in order to save…”
State v. Kirksey, 575 N.W.2d 377 (Neb. 1998). “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1141 (Reissue 1995).”
State v. Howard, 26 Neb. Ct. App. 628 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018). “§ 25-1141 (Reissue 2016) to argue that his initial objection was sufficient to challenge all of the pros- ecutor’s statements and that he was not required to repeatedly object to every statement he now challenges. We first note that Howard never objected to any statements made…”
State v. Guy, 419 N.W.2d 152 (Neb. 1988). “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1141 (Reissue 1985) provides: Where an objection has once been made to the admission of testimony and overruled by the court it shall *615 be unnecessary to repeat the same objection to further testimony of the same nature by the same witness in order to…”
Pospishil v. Kemp, 17 N.W.2d 477 (Neb. 1945). “Section 25-1141, R. S. 1943, reads as follows: “Where an objection has once been made to the admission of testimony and overruled by the court it shall be unnecessary to repeat .”
Rakes v. State, 62 N.W.2d 273 (Neb. 1954). “In that regard, section 25-1141, R. R. S. 1943, which provides that: “* * * it shall be unnecessary to repeat the same objection to further testimony of the same nature by the same witness in order to save the error, if any, in the ruling of the court whereby such testimony was…”
Leflang v. Smith, 18 N.W.2d 500 (Neb. 1945). “1, I will ask you if you know the signature attached to .that instrument? A. Yes; that is Dr.”
State v. Lindberg, 908 N.W.2d 678 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018). “However, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1141 (Reissue 2016) provides that when an objection has been made once "to the admission of testimony and overruled by the court it shall be unnecessary to repeat the same objection to further testimony of the same nature by the same witness in…”
State v. Larkin, 383 N.W.2d 804 (Neb. 1986). “Thus, it was unnecessary that defendant object again when the owner was asked to state whether the insurer was going to pay her the $130.”
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.