Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 25

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2181

Report of referees

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

If it appears to the referee or referees that partition cannot be made without great prejudice to the owners, they shall so report to the court.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1950–2021 · leading case: Channer v. Cumming
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Channer v. Cumming (2005) neb · cites it 2× “Section 25-2181 provides that if the referee so appointed determines that the property cannot be partitioned in kind, he or she shall make a report to that effect to the district court.”
Schlake v. Schlake (2016) neb “There, the district court appointed a referee to make partition and report back to the court and appeal was taken from that order.”
Ark Land Co. v. Harper (2004) wva · cites it 2× “§ 70-29-202 (West 2003); Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-2181 (1995); Nev.Rev.Stat.”
Kellner v. Kellner (1999) nebctapp · cites it 2× “See *14 § 25-2181. We are not implying a divorce court, a court of equity, is limited to the partition statutes in dividing property, but these statutes do contain a time-tried procedure.”
Trowbridge v. Donner (1950) neb · cites it 2× “97 , this court concluded that the effect of section 25-2181, R. R. S. 1943, and section 25-2183, R.”
FTR Farms v. Rist Farm (2020) neb · cites it 2× “[7] Although the term “owelty” appears only once in our reported decisions, 16 it has ancient roots.”
Phillips v. Phillips (1960) neb · cites it 2× “We come then to the second question raised by ap *740 pellant which is, was it proper, under the circumstances here shown, for the trial court to order a partition in kind in the manner that it did? Section 25-2181, R. R. S. 1943, provides: “If it appears to the referee or…”
Smith v. Smith (2021) nebctapp · cites it 2× “Essentially, appellants argue that the partition in kind did not yield their full share of the total value of the co-owned land and that the co-owned land should have been sold in its entirety.”
Smith v. Smith (2021) nebctapp · cites it 2× “Essentially, appellants argue that the partition in kind did not yield their full share of the total value of the co-owned land and that the co-owned land should have been sold in its entirety.”
Koetter v. Koetter (2018) nebctapp · cites it 2× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2181 (Reissue 2016) and § 25-2183.”
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.