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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1901 (2026)

District court; appellate jurisdiction; scope

✓ 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 judgment rendered or final order made by any tribunal, board, or officer exercising judicial functions and inferior in jurisdiction to the district court may be reversed, vacated, or modified by the district court, except that the district court shall not have jurisdiction over (1) appeals from a juvenile court as defined in section 43-245, (2) appeals from a county court in matters arising under the Nebraska Probate Code or the Nebraska Uniform Trust Code, in matters involving adoption or inheritance tax, or in domestic relations matters, or (3) appeals within the jurisdiction of the Tax Equalization and Review Commission.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 123 cases (20 in the last 5 years), 1952–2026 · leading case: McEwen v. Nebraska State Coll. Sys., 931 N.W.2d 120 (Neb. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
McEwen v. Nebraska State Coll. Sys., 931 N.W.2d 120 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 11× “2 See Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-1901 to 25-1908 (Reissue 2016).”
In re Olmer, 752 N.W.2d 124 (Neb. 2008). · cites it 18× “One of the issues presented to the district court was whether Olmer's appeal from the Board's decision is governed by Neb.Rev. Stat. § 25-1901 (Supp.2007) and is therefore treated as a review on a petition in error or whether his appeal is governed by § 25-1937 which requires a…”
Champion v. Hall Cnty., 958 N.W.2d 396 (Neb. 2021). · cites it 13× “Proceedings in error under Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-1901 to 25-1908 (Reissue 2016 & Cum.”
Hawkins v. City of Omaha, 627 N.W.2d 118 (Neb. 2001). · cites it 9× “” Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-1901 to 25-1937 (Reissue 1995, Cum.”
McClellan v. Bd. of Equalization, 748 N.W.2d 66 (Neb. 2008). · cites it 9× “" [28] It is also noteworthy, in considering the intent of the original TERC Act, that due to a recent amendment, [29] the petition in error statute, Neb. Rev.Stat. § 25-1901 (Supp.2007), now specifically states that "the district court shall *73 not have jurisdiction over .”
Greenholtz v. Inmates of the Nebraska Penal & Corr. Complex, 442 U.S. 1 (1979). · cites it 2× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1901 et seq. (1975).”
McNally v. City of Omaha, 731 N.W.2d 573 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 5× “§ 14-813 (Reissue 1997), Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1901 (Cum. Supp. 2006), or even the catchall provision, Neb.”
Jackson v. Bd. of Equalization, 630 N.W.2d 680 (Neb. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 5× “” Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-1901 through 25-1908 (Reissue 1995) govern reviews on petition in error.”
Miller v. Brunswick, 571 N.W.2d 245 (Neb. 1997). · cites it 6× “To support this position, Brunswick argues this case is not a “civil case” as listed in the statutory section applicable to appeals from a county court to the district court, see Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2728 (Reissue 1995), and cites to cases regarding procedures followed pursuant…”
Moore v. Black, 368 N.W.2d 488 (Neb. 1985). · cites it 5× “On June 27, 1984, following a trial at which evidence was presented, the district court dismissed the action on the basis that an appeal from the board can only be had by a proceeding in error under the provisions of Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-1901 et seq. (Reissue 1979)-.”
Ditter v. Nebraska Bd. of Parole, 655 N.W.2d 43 (Neb. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 4× “Unhappy with the results of the Board’s review, Ditter filed a petition in error pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1901 et seq. (Reissue 1995 & Cum.”
Crown Prods. Co. v. City of Ralston, 567 N.W.2d 294 (Neb. 1997). · cites it 4× “See Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1901 (Cum.Supp.1994). In reviewing a decision of a tribunal in a petition in error proceeding, a court is to determine whether the tribunal acted within its jurisdiction and whether the decision rendered is supported by sufficient relevant evidence.”
Show all 123 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.