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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332 (2026)

Motion for summary judgment; proceedings

✓ 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

(1) The motion shall be served at least ten days before the time fixed for the hearing. The adverse party prior to the day of hearing may serve opposing affidavits. The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings and the evidence admitted at the hearing show that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. The evidence that may be received on a motion for summary judgment includes depositions, answers to interrogatories, admissions, stipulations, and affidavits. A summary judgment, interlocutory in character, may be rendered on the issue of liability alone although there is a genuine dispute as to the amount of damages.

(2) A party asserting that a fact cannot be or is genuinely disputed must support the assertion by:

(a) Citing to particular parts of materials in the record, including depositions, answers to interrogatories, admissions, stipulations, affidavits, or other materials; or

(b) Showing that the materials cited do not establish the absence or presence of a genuine dispute, or that an adverse party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.

(3) If a party fails to properly support an assertion of fact or fails to properly address another party's assertion of fact as required by subsection (2) of this section, the court may:

(a) Give an opportunity to properly support or address the fact;

(b) Consider the fact undisputed for purposes of the motion;

(c) Grant summary judgment if the motion and supporting materials, including the facts considered undisputed, show that the movant is entitled to summary judgment; or

(d) Issue any other appropriate order.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 211 cases (18 in the last 5 years), 1952–2026 · leading case: Clark v. Scheels All Sports, 989 N.W.2d 39 (Neb. 2023).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Clark v. Scheels All Sports, 989 N.W.2d 39 (Neb. 2023). · cites it 31× “2022) and conclude they expressly allow a moving party to show the absence of a genuine dispute as to any material fact by showing that “an adverse party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.” 1 We also conclude that Scheels satisfied its prima facie burden by…”
Ecker v. E&A Consulting Grp., Inc., 924 N.W.2d 671 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 6× “We moved this case to our docket, because it presents an issue of first impression regarding revisions to the statute allowing motions for summary judgment as set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332 (Supp. 2017). We affirm.”
Blitzkie v. State, 422 N.W.2d 773 (Neb. 1988). · cites it 8× “e parties appeared for argument on the *775 State's motion to dismiss, the district court treated the State's motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment, granted summary judgment, namely, the State's conduct was discretionary conduct "within the specific exemption of the…”
Woodhouse Ford, Inc. v. Laflan, 687 N.W.2d 672 (Neb. 2004). · cites it 5× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332 (Cum. Supp. 2002) provides in part that “[t]he adverse party prior to the day of hearing may serve opposing affidavits.”
New Tek Mfg., Inc. v. Beehner, 702 N.W.2d 336 (Neb. 2005). · cites it 4× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332 (Cum. Supp. 2004) provides that after a hearing on a motion for summary judgment, “[t]he judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings and the evidence admitted at the hearing show that there is no genuine issue as to *276 any material…”
Witherspoon v. Sides Const. Co., 362 N.W.2d 35 (Neb. 1985). · cites it 4× “*39 Facts and Posture of Case The primary purpose of the summary judgment procedure is to pierce the allegations made in the pleadings and show conclusively that the controlling facts are other than as pled, and thus resolve, without the expense and delay of trial, those cases…”
Gottsch v. Bank of Stapleton, 458 N.W.2d 443 (Neb. 1990). · cites it 4× “Although FNB’s argument concentrates only on collateral estoppel, the method by which the trial court granted summary judgment implicitly raises two fundamental questions, namely, whether a trial court may use judicial notice to establish a material fact necessary for summary…”
Anderson v. Serv. Merch. Co., 485 N.W.2d 170 (Neb. 1992). · cites it 5× “§ 25-1332 (Reissue 1989) provides in part: “The [summary] judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving…”
Thompson v. Johnson, 910 N.W.2d 800 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 2× “For the benefit of judges and practitioners, we take this opportunity to note that, effective August 24, 2017, the Legislature modified Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332 (Supp. 2017) to impose citation and argument requirements regarding assertions of disputed facts on summary judgment.”
Bohling v. Bohling, 937 N.W.2d 855 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 3× “BOHLING such an affidavit is not preserved in a bill of exceptions, its existence or contents cannot be known by this court. .”
Ruwe v. Farmers Mut. United Ins. Co., 469 N.W.2d 129 (Neb. 1991). · cites it 4× “See Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1332 (Reissue 1989). However, there simply is no statutory authorization for this hybrid procedure which Farmers has created to challenge Ruwe's second amended petition.”
Recio v. Evers, 771 N.W.2d 121 (Neb. 2009). · cites it 2× “But while actual malice is generally an issue of fact, [37] there is a difference between an "issue of fact" and a "genuine issue as to any material fact" within the meaning of Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1332 (Reissue 2008) (emphasis supplied).”
Show all 211 citing cases →
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332(1): 2 cases
Clark v. Scheels All Sports, 989 N.W.2d 39 (Neb. 2023). “2022) and conclude they expressly allow a moving party to show the absence of a genuine dispute as to any material fact by showing that “an adverse party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.” 1 We also conclude that Scheels satisfied its prima facie burden by…”
Ray v. Beatrice Cmty. Hosp. & Health Ctr., No. A-21-240 (Neb. Ct. App. Feb. 8, 2022).
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332(2): 4 cases
Ecker v. E&A Consulting Grp., Inc., 924 N.W.2d 671 (Neb. 2019). “We moved this case to our docket, because it presents an issue of first impression regarding revisions to the statute allowing motions for summary judgment as set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332 (Supp. 2017). We affirm.”
Clark v. Scheels All Sports, 989 N.W.2d 39 (Neb. 2023). “2022) and conclude they expressly allow a moving party to show the absence of a genuine dispute as to any material fact by showing that “an adverse party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.” 1 We also conclude that Scheels satisfied its prima facie burden by…”
Ecker v. E & A Consulting Grp., 302 Neb. 578 (Neb. 2019).
Ecker v. E & A Consulting Grp., 302 Neb. 578 (Neb. 2019).
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332(2)(a): 1 case
Clark v. Scheels All Sports, 989 N.W.2d 39 (Neb. 2023). “2022) and conclude they expressly allow a moving party to show the absence of a genuine dispute as to any material fact by showing that “an adverse party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.” 1 We also conclude that Scheels satisfied its prima facie burden by…”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332(2)(b): 1 case
Clark v. Scheels All Sports, 989 N.W.2d 39 (Neb. 2023). “2022) and conclude they expressly allow a moving party to show the absence of a genuine dispute as to any material fact by showing that “an adverse party cannot produce admissible evidence to support the fact.” 1 We also conclude that Scheels satisfied its prima facie burden by…”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332(3): 3 cases
Ecker v. E&A Consulting Grp., Inc., 924 N.W.2d 671 (Neb. 2019). “We moved this case to our docket, because it presents an issue of first impression regarding revisions to the statute allowing motions for summary judgment as set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332 (Supp. 2017). We affirm.”
Ecker v. E & A Consulting Grp., 302 Neb. 578 (Neb. 2019).
Ecker v. E & A Consulting Grp., 302 Neb. 578 (Neb. 2019).
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1332(3)(a): 1 case
Ray v. Beatrice Cmty. Hosp. & Health Ctr., No. A-21-240 (Neb. Ct. App. Feb. 8, 2022).
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.