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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1919 (2026)

Appeal; briefs; rules; plain error

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

The Supreme Court shall by rule provide for the filing of briefs in all causes appealed to the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court. The brief of appellant shall set out particularly each error asserted and intended to be urged for the reversal, vacation, or modification of the judgment, decree, or final order alleged to be erroneous, but no petition in error or other assignment of errors shall be required beyond or in addition to such requirement. The Court of Appeals or Supreme Court may at its option consider a plain error not specified in appellant's brief.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 99 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1945–2026 · leading case: Stalder v. Anne T. (In Re S.T.), 300 Neb. 72 (Neb. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Stalder v. Anne T. (In Re S.T.), 300 Neb. 72 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 2× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1919 (Reissue 2016) and Neb.”
State v. Evans, 338 N.W.2d 788 (Neb. 1983). · cites it 4× “Since consideration of assignments of error is limited to those discussed in the brief, we do not address tendered instruction Nos.”
City of Gordon v. Montana Feeders, Corp., 730 N.W.2d 387 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 3× “6 Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1919 (Reissue 1995).”
In Re Interest of NLB, 450 N.W.2d 676 (Neb. 1990). · cites it 4× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1919 (Reissue 1989); Neb.”
State v. Kinney, 350 N.W.2d 552 (Neb. 1984). · cites it 4× “The order of probation which had been signed is therefore nullified...." The court then sentenced defendant to 7 days' imprisonment, fined him $200, and suspended his driver's license for 6 months.”
Houser v. Am. Paving Asphalt, 299 Neb. 1 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 2× “Houser then filed its responsive brief, evidently noting American Paving’s failure to file a statement of errors.”
Great N. Ins. Co. v. Transit Auth. of Omaha, 308 Neb. 916 (Neb. 2021). · cites it 2× “§ 25-1919 (Reissue 2016), which states that “[t]he brief of appellant shall set out particularly each error asserted and intended to be urged for the reversal, vacation, or modification of the judgment, decree, or final order alleged to be erroneous .”
State v. Jennings, 308 Neb. 835 (Neb. 2021). · cites it 2× “Instead, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1919 (Reissue 2016) provides: The brief of appellant shall set out particularly each error asserted and intended to be urged for the reversal, vaca- tion, or modification of the judgment, decree, or final order alleged to be erroneous, but no…”
State v. Roth, 382 N.W.2d 348 (Neb. 1986). · cites it 4× “Neb. Rev.Stat. § 25-1919 (Reissue 1979); *352 Schmidt v.”
In Interest of AW, 401 N.W.2d 477 (Neb. 1987). · cites it 2× “2d 36 (1986); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1919 (Reissue 1985); Neb.”
Stewart v. Heineman, 296 Neb. 262 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 2× “52 See, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1919 (Reissue 2016); In re Estate of Balvin, 295 Neb.”
State v. Myers, 510 N.W.2d 58 (Neb. 1994). · cites it 2× “See, also, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1919 (Cum. Supp. 1992).”
Show all 99 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.