Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2218 (2026)

Common law; applicability

✓ current as of July 2026

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

The rule of the common law that statutes in derogation thereof are to be strictly construed has no application to this code.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1965–2016 · leading case: ML Manager v. Jensen, 287 Neb. 171 (Neb. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

ML Manager v. Jensen, 287 Neb. 171 (Neb. 2014). · cites it 7× “Statutory interpretation is a question of law that an appellate court resolves independently of the trial court.”

Huntington v. Pedersen, 883 N.W.2d 48 (Neb. 2016). · cites it 2× “2d 566 (2014), we recognized that in earlier cases, we had stated that because garnishment statutes were in derogation of common law, they were to be strictly construed; however, we noted that by stating this in our prior cases, we ignored Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2218 (Reissue…”

Fisher v. Heirs & Devisees of T.D. Lovercheck, 291 Neb. 9 (Neb. 2015). · cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2218 (Reissue 2008) provides: “The rule of the common law that statutes in derogation thereof are to be strictly construed has no application to this code.”

Rogers v. W. Elec. Co., 138 N.W.2d 423 (Neb. 1965). ““The basis of the right to bring such a cross-suit is to be found in sections 1 and 429 of the code (now sections 25-2218 and 25-1302, R. R. S. 1943), and in the consideration that in cases where the code is silent,, remedies furnished by the old common law or equity practice,…”

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.