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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-221 (2026)

Statute of limitations; trial procedure

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

In any action in which it is claimed by one or more of the defendants that the action is barred by the statute of limitations any party may move that the issue raised by the statute of limitations be tried separately and determined before any other issues in the case. Issues of fact raised by the statute of limitations shall be tried before a jury unless trial by jury is waived by all parties. Issues of law raised by the statute of limitations shall be determined by the court without a jury. If the issue raised by the statute of limitations is determined by the jury or the court in favor of the plaintiff the remaining issues shall then be tried. If the issue raised by the statute of limitations is determined by the jury or the court in favor of the defendant the action or actions barred by the statute of limitations shall be dismissed.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1972–2025 · leading case: Blankenau v. Landess, 626 N.W.2d 588 (Neb. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Blankenau v. Landess, 626 N.W.2d 588 (Neb. 2001). · cites it 5× “Next, Landess asserts that she should have been given a separate trial on the statute of limitations issue under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-221 (Cum. Supp. 2000) prior to the trial on Blankenau’s restitution claim.”
Gillam v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co., 489 N.W.2d 289 (Neb. 1992). · cites it 8× “That issue was tried separately, pursuant to Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-221 (Reissue 1989). The trial court heard the matter without a jury and found that the action was barred.”
City of Wood River v. Geer-Melkus Constr. Co., 444 N.W.2d 305 (Neb. 1989). · cites it 5× “LOSS OF JURISDICTION BY THE DISTRICT COURT TO MODIFY ITS OWN ORDERS The term of court ended after the trial on the statute of limitations and the court’s ruling against Hormel.”
Keef v. State, Dep't of Motor Vehs., 634 N.W.2d 751 (Neb. 2001). · cites it 2× “See, also, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-221 (Cum. Supp. 2000).”
Reimers-Hild v. State, 741 N.W.2d 155 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 2× “6 See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-221 (Cum. Supp. 2006).”
Cent. States Resources, Corp. v. First Nat'l Bank, 501 N.W.2d 271 (Neb. 1993). · cites it 2× “The trial court heard only the issue of the statute of limitations as provided by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-221 (Reissue 1989). That section provides that any party may move that the issue of the bar of the statute of limitations be tried separately.”
Bd. of Regents of the Univ. of Nebraska v. Wilscam Mullins Birge, Inc., 433 N.W.2d 478 (Neb. 1988). · cites it 2× “The trial was bifurcated, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-221 (Reissue 1985), to determine the issues related to Wilscam’s statute of limitations defense, and all the parties agreed that the matter should be tried to the court without a jury.”
West Omaha Investments v. Sanitary & Improvement Dist. No. 48, 420 N.W.2d 291 (Neb. 1988). · cites it 2× “The last amended petition was dismissed, according to the order of the trial court, because “[t]he Court finds that the plaintiff failed to present a claim within the one year time period required by statute and that the petition should be dismissed pursuant to Section 25-221,…”
T. S. McShane Co. v. Dominion Constr. Co., 278 N.W.2d 596 (Neb. 1979). · cites it 2× “Prior to a trial on the merits, defendant filed a motion under section 25-221, R. R. S. 1943, to try the issue of the applicability of the statute of limitations separately from any other issue.”
Baltensperger v. Wellensiek, 554 N.W.2d 137 (Neb. 1996). · cites it 3× “Addressing Baltensperger’s first and second assignments of error, the granting of the demurrer without a separate hearing to address the statute of limitations “issue” pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-221 (Reissue 1995) was proper because no facts, only conclusions of law, had…”
Vergara v. Lopez-Vasquez, 510 N.W.2d 550 (Neb. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “The trial was bifurcated pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-221 (Reissue 1989) to determine the statute of limitations issue before any other issues were decided by the court.”
Lincoln Grain, Inc. v. Coopers & Lybrand, 338 N.W.2d 594 (Neb. 1983). · cites it 2× “In a trial pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-221 (Reissue 1979), the District Court held that the 2-year statute of limitations of Neb.”
Show all 31 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.