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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142 (2026)

New trial, defined; grounds

✓ text as last checked Oct. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A new trial is a reexamination in the same court of an issue of fact after a verdict by a jury, report of a referee, or a trial and decision by the court. The former verdict, report, or decision shall be vacated and a new trial granted on the application of the party aggrieved for any of the following causes affecting materially the substantial rights of such party: (1) Irregularity in the proceedings of the court, jury, referee, or prevailing party or any order of the court or referee or abuse of discretion by which the party was prevented from having a fair trial; (2) misconduct of the jury or prevailing party; (3) accident or surprise, which ordinary prudence could not have guarded against; (4) excessive damages, appearing to have been given under the influence of passion or prejudice; (5) error in the assessment of the amount of recovery, whether too large or too small, if the action is upon a contract or for the injury or detention of property; (6) that the verdict, report, or decision is not sustained by sufficient evidence or is contrary to law; (7) newly discovered evidence, material for the party applying, which the moving party could not, with reasonable diligence, have discovered and produced at the trial; and (8) error of law occurring at the trial and excepted to by the party making the application.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 132 cases (15 in the last 5 years), 1945–2025 · leading case: Woodhouse Ford, Inc. v. Laflan, 687 N.W.2d 672 (Neb. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Woodhouse Ford, Inc. v. Laflan, 687 N.W.2d 672 (Neb. 2004). · cites it 6× “Neb. Rev. Stat. §25-1142 (Cum. Supp. 2002); Central Neb.”
Holmes v. Crossroads Jt. Venture, 629 N.W.2d 511 (Neb. 2001). · cites it 6× “§ 25-1142 (Reissue 1995), which provides, in relevant part, that a verdict "shall be vacated and a new trial granted on the application of the party aggrieved, for any of the following causes, affecting materially the substantial rights of such party: .”
Crewdson v. Burlington N. R.R., 452 N.W.2d 270 (Neb. 1990). · cites it 8× “DAMAGES BN's last assigned error claims the trial court erred in failing to vacate the damages award.”
Diversified Telecom Servs., Inc. v. Clevinger, 683 N.W.2d 338 (Neb. 2004). · cites it 6× “and moves this Court pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142 , et seq. (Reissue 2000) for an order granting a new trial in this matter.”
Clarke v. First Nat. Bank of Omaha, 895 N.W.2d 284 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 4× “Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142 (Reissue 2016), a new trial is a reexamination in the same court of an issue of fact after a verdict by a jury, a report of a referee, or a trial and decision by the court.”
Williams v. Monarch Transp., Inc., 470 N.W.2d 751 (Neb. 1991). · cites it 10× “WRONGFUL DEATH DAMAGES Concerning the amount of recovery in a wrongful death action, Neb.Rev.Stat. § 30-810 (Reissue 1989) in pertinent part provides: "The verdict or judgment should be for the amount of damages which the persons [widow, widower, or next of kin] in whose behalf…”
Jaeger v. Jaeger, 951 N.W.2d 367 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 3× “Nor do we find that the district court abused its discretion in excluding Stacey’s testimony about past abuse allegations and overruling Stacey’s motion for a new trial. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the district court.”
Betterman v. Dept. of Motor Vehs., 728 N.W.2d 570 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 2× “Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142 (Cum. Supp. 2006), a new trial may be granted if new evidence has been discovered which materially affects the substantial rights of the moving party.”
State v. Bartel, 953 N.W.2d 224 (Neb. 2021). · cites it 4× “and Bartel had stipulated that the 2015 protection order should be rendered “void as of the date of entry.”
Shipler v. Gen. Motors Corp., 710 N.W.2d 807 (Neb. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142 (4) (Cum. Supp.”
Harmon Cable Commc'ns of Nebraska Ltd. P'ship v. Scope Cable Television, Inc., 468 N.W.2d 350 (Neb. 1991). · cites it 4× “(a) Reassembly The sellers contend that since the purchaser’s motion to correct the verdict forms was not filed until 13 days after they were returned, the motion was untimely under Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-1142 and 25-1143 (Reissue 1989).”
Cent. Nebraska Pub. Power & Irrigation Dist. v. Jeffrey Lake Dev., Inc., 679 N.W.2d 235 (Neb. 2004). · cites it 3× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142 (Cum. Supp. 2002) provides in relevant part: A new trial is a reexamination in the same court of an issue of fact after a verdict by a jury, report of a referee, or a trial and decision by the court.”
Show all 132 citing cases →
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142(1): 4 cases
Sulzle v. Sulzle, 14 N.W.3d 532 (Neb. 2024).
Smith v. Smith, No. A-15-1234 (Neb. Ct. App. Nov. 29, 2016).
State v. Jarvel W., No. A-18-623 (Neb. Ct. App. June 18, 2019).
Manetti v. Smith, No. A-24-329 (Neb. Ct. App. Mar. 11, 2025).
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142(2): 5 cases
State v. Allen, 992 N.W.2d 712 (Neb. 2023).
Loving v. Baker's Supermarkets, Inc., 472 N.W.2d 695 (Neb. 1991).
State v. Allen, 314 Neb. 663 (2023).
Zitterkopf v. Zitterkopf, No. A-22-152 (Neb. Ct. App. Feb. 7, 2023).
Manetti v. Smith, No. A-24-329 (Neb. Ct. App. Mar. 11, 2025).
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142(4): 2 cases
Holmes v. Crossroads Jt. Venture, 629 N.W.2d 511 (Neb. 2001). “§ 25-1142 (Reissue 1995), which provides, in relevant part, that a verdict "shall be vacated and a new trial granted on the application of the party aggrieved, for any of the following causes, affecting materially the substantial rights of such party: .”
Williams v. Monarch Transp., Inc., 470 N.W.2d 751 (Neb. 1991). “WRONGFUL DEATH DAMAGES Concerning the amount of recovery in a wrongful death action, Neb.Rev.Stat. § 30-810 (Reissue 1989) in pertinent part provides: "The verdict or judgment should be for the amount of damages which the persons [widow, widower, or next of kin] in whose behalf…”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142(5): 1 case
Manetti v. Smith, No. A-24-329 (Neb. Ct. App. Mar. 11, 2025).
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142(6): 7 cases
Dunn v. Hemberger, 430 N.W.2d 516 (Neb. 1988).
Bridwell v. Walton, 925 N.W.2d 94 (Neb. Ct. App. 2019).
In re Masek Fam. Trust, 977 N.W.2d 919 (Neb. 2022).
In re Masek Fam. Trust, 15 N.W.3d 379 (Neb. 2025).
Cotton v. Gering Pub. Schs., 511 N.W.2d 549 (Neb. Ct. App. 1993).
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142(7): 5 cases
Bert Cattle Co. v. Warren, 471 N.W.2d 764 (Neb. 1991).
Woodhouse Ford, Inc. v. Laflan, 687 N.W.2d 672 (Neb. 2004). “Neb. Rev. Stat. §25-1142 (Cum. Supp. 2002); Central Neb.”
State v. Bartel, 953 N.W.2d 224 (Neb. 2021). “and Bartel had stipulated that the 2015 protection order should be rendered “void as of the date of entry.”
Kelly v. Kelly, 510 N.W.2d 90 (Neb. Ct. App. 1993).
Yost v. Davita, Inc., No. A-15-197, A-15-234, A-15-235 (Neb. Ct. App. Dec. 29, 2015).
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1142(8): 1 case
Drucker v. Goscar, Inc., 168 N.W.2d 534 (Neb. 1969).
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.