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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-218 (2026)

Claims by and against the state; when barred

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

Every claim and demand against the state shall be forever barred unless action is brought thereon within two years after the claim arose. Every claim and demand on behalf of the state, except for revenue, or upon official bonds, or for loans or money belonging to the school funds, or loans of school or other trust funds, or to lands or interest in lands thereto belonging, shall be barred by the same lapse of time as is provided by the law in case of like demands between private parties. This section shall not apply to any claim or demand against the state regarding property taxes.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases, 1954–2017 · leading case: Hike v. State, 297 Neb. 212 (Neb. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hike v. State, 297 Neb. 212 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 22× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-218 (Reissue 2016) is the applicable statute of limitations for claims of inverse condemnation against the State because § 25-218 is more specific on the subject than is Neb.”
Czarnick v. Loup River Pub. Power Dist., 209 N.W.2d 595 (Neb. 1973). · cites it 12× “Section 25-218, R.R.S.1943, provides in part that: "Every claim and demand against the state shall be forever barred, unless action be brought thereon within two years after the claim arose.”
Teater v. State, 559 N.W.2d 758 (Neb. 1997). · cites it 4× “Thus, the court held that Teater's claim was barred by the 2-year statute of limitations found in Neb.Rev. Stat. § 25-218 (Reissue 1995). Teater had alleged in her petition that she was unaware of the sexual abuse because the traumatic nature of the conduct led her to repress…”
L.J. Vontz Constr. Co. v. Dep't of Roads, 440 N.W.2d 664 (Neb. 1989). · cites it 3× “DOR filed a motion to dismiss Vontz’ claim, asserting that the claim was barred by the statute of limitations contained in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-218 (Reissue 1985), which in pertinent part provides: “Every claim and demand against the state shall be forever barred, unless the…”
Cnty. of Lancaster v. Leonard, 715 N.W.2d 496 (Neb. 2006). · cites it 2× “We note that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-218 (Reissue 1995) applies various limitation periods to every claim or demand on behalf of the state “except for revenue, or upon official bonds, or for loans or money belonging to the school funds, or loans of school or other trust funds, or…”
Dairyland Power Coop. v. State Bd. of Equalization & Assessment, 472 N.W.2d 363 (Neb. 1991). · cites it 2× “For claims filed for tax year 1985 and prior tax years, the claims are barred by the statute of limitations contained in section 25-218, R.R.S. 1943. The statute requires that claims against the state must be brought within two years from the date such claims arose.”
Wood v. Tesch, 386 N.W.2d 436 (Neb. 1986). · cites it 2× “In their answer Tesch and the county generally denied Wood’s allegations and asserted that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, such being lodged in the Commission of Industrial' Relations by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-810 (Reissue 1984), and, further, that any cause of…”
Entergy Arkansas, Inc. v. Nebraska, 226 F. Supp. 2d 1047 (D. Neb. 2002). · cites it 2× “For statute of limitations purposes, the most appropriate analogy in a suit alleging a breach of an interstate compact is to a contract action between private parties.”
Biby v. Bd. of Regents of Univ. of Nebraska, 340 F. Supp. 2d 1031 (D. Neb. 2004). · cites it 3× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-218. Plaintiffs employment was terminated on November 12, 1999.”
In Re Ernst's Guardianship, 62 N.W.2d 110 (Neb. 1954). · cites it 2× “It is not a continuing open account as contended by the county; nor is the recovery by the county against the estate of the insane ward a claim for the recovery of revenue by the state within the meaning of section 25-218, R. R. S. 1943. We conclude that the trial court properly…”
McCoy v. Albin, 298 Neb. 297 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 5× “Following a hearing, an appeal tribunal, citing Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-218 (Reissue 2016), concluded that the Department’s action was barred by a 4-year statute of limitations.”
Budler v. Gen. Motors Corp., 252 F. Supp. 2d 874 (D. Neb. 2003). · cites it 2× “” Neb.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 25-218 (Michie 1995).”
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.