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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1905 (2026)

Proceedings in error; transcript; abstracts of record not required in Supreme Court

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The plaintiff in error shall file with his or her petition a transcript of the proceedings or a praecipe directing the tribunal, board, or officer to prepare the transcript of the proceedings. The transcript shall contain the final judgment or order sought to be reversed, vacated, or modified. No written or printed abstract or any copy of an abstract of the records shall be required in any case in the Supreme Court of this state.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 40 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1953–2025 · leading case: Lancaster Cnty. v. Slezak, 317 Neb. 157 (Neb. 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lancaster Cnty. v. Slezak, 317 Neb. 157 (Neb. 2024). · cites it 9× “We agree with the county that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction here and that we thus have juris- diction over this appeal.”
Moore v. Black, 368 N.W.2d 488 (Neb. 1985). · cites it 4× “” Since Moore failed to satisfy the requirements of §§ 25-1905 and 25-1931, it is clear that no valid proceeding for review by error was perfected.”
Marcotte v. City of Omaha, 241 N.W.2d 838 (Neb. 1976). · cites it 5× “Section 25-1905, R. R. S. 1943, requires the plaintiff in error to file with his petition a transcript of the proceedings containing the final judgment or order sought to be reversed, vacated, or modified.”
McNally v. City of Omaha, 731 N.W.2d 573 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 3× “*565 In addition, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1905 (Reissue 1995) directs the petitioner to “file with his or her petition a transcript of the proceedings or a praecipe directing the tribunal, board, or officer to prepare the transcript of the proceedings.”
Champion v. Hall Cnty., 309 Neb. 55 (Neb. 2021). · cites it 2× “Petition in Error Champion and the FOP timely filed a petition in error with the district court for Hall County, filing therewith a praecipe for transcript and bill of exceptions in accordance with Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1905 (Reissue 2016).”
Abboud v. Lakeview, Inc., 466 N.W.2d 442 (Neb. 1991). · cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1903 (Reissue 1989) provides that the proceedings to obtain a reversal, vacation, or modification must be made by petition entitled “petition in error” filed in a court having the power to reverse, vacate, or modify the decision, and must set forth the…”
Anania v. City of Omaha, 102 N.W.2d 49 (Neb. 1960). · cites it 4× “The relevant part of section 25-1905, R. R. S. 1943, states: “The plaintiff in error shall file with his petition a transcript of the proceedings containing the final judgment or order sought to be reversed, vacated or modified.”
Landrum v. City of Omaha Plan. Bd., 297 Neb. 165 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-1905 and 25-1931 (Reissue 2016) govern proceedings in error and require that within 30 days after the rendition of the final judgment or order sought to be reversed, vacated, or modified, a petitioner in error must file a petition and an appropriate…”
River City Life Ctr. Ltd. P'ship v. Douglas Cnty. Bd. of Equalization, 658 N.W.2d 717 (Neb. 2003). · cites it 17× “The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court and Court of Appeals erred in dismissing the appeal for lack of jurisdiction for the reason that the appellants’ praecipe was not filed with the clerk of the district court, as required by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1905 (Reissue…”
Fisher v. Hous. Auth. of City of Omaha, 334 N.W.2d 636 (Neb. 1983). · cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1905 (Reissue 1979); Richardson v.”
Clark v. Cornwell, 388 N.W.2d 848 (Neb. 1986). · cites it 6× “James Clark appeals the dismissal of his petition in error in the district court for Lancaster County as the result of Clark’s failure to file a transcript, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1905 (Reissue 1985), within 1 calendar month after the order, Neb.”
Transcon Lines, Inc. v. O'NEAL, 429 N.W.2d 718 (Neb. 1988). · cites it 8× “While this court has not yet determined whether the filing of a certified copy of the transcript of proceedings before the NEOC is jurisdictional, the court has addressed the jurisdictional issue in the context of other statutes which require the aggrieved party to file a…”
Show all 40 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.