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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1515 (2026)

Judgment; when dormant

✓ 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

If execution is not sued out within five years after the date of entry of any judgment that now is or may hereafter be rendered in any court of record in this state, or if five years have intervened between the date of the last execution issued on such judgment and the time of suing out another writ of execution thereon, such judgment, and all taxable costs in the action in which such judgment was obtained, shall become dormant and shall cease to operate as a lien on the estate of the judgment debtor.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1945–2023 · leading case: McCullough v. McCullough, 910 N.W.2d 515 (Neb. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
McCullough v. McCullough, 910 N.W.2d 515 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 4× “Wallace alternatively claims that he could not be found to be in willful contempt with respect to the equalization payment, because Michelle failed to execute on the judgment within 5 years as required by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1515 (Reissue 2016), and that therefore, the judgment…”
Weber v. Gasn Shop, Inc., 767 N.W.2d 746 (Neb. 2009). · cites it 4× “The court reasoned that the workers' compensation award became dormant pursuant to Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1515 (Reissue 2008) in April 2000, 5 years after the last payment to Weber was made, and that it had not been revived by the Workers' Compensation Court.”
Allen v. Immanuel Med. Ctr., 767 N.W.2d 502 (Neb. 2009). · cites it 16× “The district court dismissed the garnishment action, reasoning that the award became dormant pursuant to Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1515 (Reissue 2008) in April 1996, 5 years after the date Allen last received a benefit payment, and that because 10 years had passed, it could no longer…”
Buffalo Cnty. v. Kizzier, 548 N.W.2d 757 (Neb. 1996). · cites it 4× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1515 (Reissue 1995) provides: If execution shall not be sued out within five years from the date of any judgment that now is or may hereafter be rendered in any court of record in this state, or if five years shall have intervened between the date of the…”
First Nat. Bank in Mitchell v. Daggett, 497 N.W.2d 358 (Neb. 1993). · cites it 5× “However, a judgment is a prerequisite for bringing a creditors’ action, Thies, supra, and the equitable-assets action, not specifically governed by any other limitations period, is therefore governed by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1515 (Reissue 1989).”
Cave v. Reiser, 684 N.W.2d 580 (Neb. 2004). · cites it 2× “Extrinsic Evidence to Impeach Judgment in Revival Proceedings Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1515 (Cum. Supp. 2002), a judgment becomes dormant and ceases to be a lien upon real estate when an execution is not sued out within 5 years after the date of entry of the judgment or if 5…”
Deuth v. Ratigan, 590 N.W.2d 366 (Neb. 1999). · cites it 2× “” *422 In the alternative, Ratigan asserted that the Iowa judgment was unenforceable because execution had not occurred within 5 years as required by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1515 (Reissue 1995).”
Hein v. WT Rawleigh Co., 92 N.W.2d 185 (Neb. 1958). · cites it 6× “Section 25-1515, R.R.S.1943, which was code section 482, R.”
St. Joseph Dev. Corp. v. Sequenzia, 585 N.W.2d 511 (Neb. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 5× “§ 25-1515 (Reissue 1995), and it provides: If execution shall not be sued out within five years from the date of any judgment that now is or may hereafter be rendered in any court of record in this state, or if five years shall have intervened between the date of the last…”
Stanton v. Stanton, 18 N.W.2d 654 (Neb. 1945). · cites it 4× “The appellant insists that the bank’s judgment obtained January 25, 1926, was not a lien after January 25, 1931, as no execution was ever issued thereon, as required by section 25-1515, R. S. 1943, which provides that if execution shall not be sued out within five years of the…”
Lippincott v. Lippincott, 41 N.W.2d 232 (Neb. 1950). · cites it 2× “1943j the statute of limitations barred this proceeding by virtue of section 25-1515, R. R. S. 1943. Factually, the statute of limitations would be no defense, since as a matter of course the proceedings herein were filed within a year from the entry of such original decree, not…”
Nelssen v. Ritchie, 934 N.W.2d 377 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 5× “§ 25-1420 (Reissue 2016), the time period to revive the dormant judgment expired in 2011. At a hearing on the motion, Nelssen offered an affidavit in which she referred to the periodic payments Ritchie made to her after the judgment was entered in 1996.”
Show all 23 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.