Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1925 (2026)

Appeal; suits in equity; trial de novo

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In all appeals from the district court in suits in equity in which review of some or all of the findings of fact of the district court is asked by the appellant, it shall be the duty of the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court to retry the issue or issues of fact involved in the finding or findings of fact complained of upon the evidence preserved in the bill of exceptions and, upon trial de novo of such question or questions of fact, reach an independent conclusion as to what finding or findings are required under the pleadings and all the evidence without reference to the conclusion reached in the district court or the fact that there may be some evidence in support thereof.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 213 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1945–2024 · leading case: Hall v. Progress Pig, Inc., 575 N.W.2d 369 (Neb. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hall v. Progress Pig, Inc., 575 N.W.2d 369 (Neb. 1998). · cites it 10× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1925 (Reissue 1995) provides that an appellate court, in its appellate review of suits in equity, shall review de novo those "findings of fact of the district court" which an appellant seeks to have reviewed.”

Kracl v. Loseke, 461 N.W.2d 67 (Neb. 1990). · cites it 4× “Before putting their house on the market, Losekes had their basement ceiling sheetrocked to cover floor joists which supported the first floor of their home.”

Kinkenon v. Hue, 301 N.W.2d 77 (Neb. 1981). · cites it 4× “In appeals to this court in suits in equity, the trial shall be de novo on questions of fact preserved for review, and we must reach an independent conclusion in findings of fact without reference to the conclusion reached in the District Court.”

Lovelace v. Stern, 297 N.W.2d 160 (Neb. 1980). · cites it 8× “The contract is ambiguous and parol evidence was properly admitted by the trial court and should be considered by this court.”

In Re Sanitary & Imp. Dist. No. 1, 708 N.W.2d 809 (Neb. 2006). · cites it 2× “Central Nebraska Public Power and Irrigation District (Central) owns and operates Johnson Lake, the supply canals that enter and exit the lake, all the shoreline, and nearly all the property adjacent to the lake.”

Am. Sec. Servs., Inc. v. Vodra, 385 N.W.2d 73 (Neb. 1986). · cites it 4× “On appeal to this court an equitable action seeking an injunction to enforce a postemployment covenant not to compete is a trial of factual questions de novo on the record, requiring this court to reach a conclusion independent of the findings of the trial court.”

Gottsch v. Bank of Stapleton, 458 N.W.2d 443 (Neb. 1990). · cites it 2× “In his second amended petition, Gottsch asserted in paragraphic form the fraud previously described in the Lincoln County action, namely, paragraph 4: Churchills defrauded Gottsch to acquire the 200 South Dakota cattle; paragraph 5: Churchills were joint venturers in the…”

Larutan Corp. v. Magnolia Homes Mfg. Co., 209 N.W.2d 177 (Neb. 1973). · cites it 8× “Section 25-101, R.R.S.1943, creating one form of civil action and abolishing the distinctions between actions at law and suits in equity and the forms thereof has not changed since its adoption in 1867.”

In re Interest of T.W., 991 N.W.2d 280 (Neb. 2023). · cites it 4× “§ 25-1925 (Reissue 2016), provides that “[i]n all appeals from the district court in suits in equity,” the appellate court shall “retry the issue or issues of fact involved in the finding or findings of fact complained of upon the evidence preserved in the bill of exceptions…”

Gleason v. Gleason, 357 N.W.2d 465 (Neb. 1984). · cites it 4× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1925 (Reissue 1979); Campbell v.”

Guggenmos v. Guggenmos, 359 N.W.2d 87 (Neb. 1984). · cites it 2× “As such, it is our duty on appeal to retry the issue or issues of fact complained of de novo on the record and reach independent conclusions without reference to the conclusions reached by the trial judge, giving weight, where the evidence is in conflict, to the fact that the…”

Dupuy v. W. State Bank, 375 N.W.2d 909 (Neb. 1985). · cites it 4× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-1925 (Reissue 1979); Nixon v.”

Show all 213 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.