(1) Any action to recover damages based on any alleged breach of warranty on improvements to real property or based on any alleged deficiency in the design, planning, supervision, or observation of construction, or construction of an improvement to real property, except improvements to real property subject to the Nebraska Condominium Act, shall be commenced within four years after any alleged act or omission constituting such breach of warranty or deficiency. If such cause of action is not discovered and could not be reasonably discovered within such four-year period, or within one year preceding the expiration of such four-year period, then the cause of action may be commenced within two years from the date of such discovery or from the date of discovery of facts which would reasonably lead to such discovery, whichever is earlier. In no event may any action be commenced to recover damages for an alleged breach of warranty on improvements to real property or deficiency in the design, planning, supervision, or observation of construction, or construction of an improvement to real property more than ten years beyond the time of the act giving rise to the cause of action.
(2)(a) Any action to recover damages based on any alleged breach of warranty on improvements to real property or based on any alleged deficiency in the design, planning, supervision, or observation of construction, or construction of an improvement to real property that is a condominium or part of a condominium project subject to the Nebraska Condominium Act shall be commenced within two years after any alleged act or omission constituting such breach of warranty or deficiency. If such cause of action is not discovered and could not be reasonably discovered within such two-year period, or within one year preceding the expiration of such two-year period, then the cause of action may be commenced within one year from the date of such discovery or from the date of discovery of facts which would reasonably lead to such discovery, whichever is earlier. In no event may any action be commenced to recover damages for an alleged breach of warranty on improvements to real property or deficiency in the design, planning, supervision, or observation of construction, or construction of an improvement to real property more than five years beyond the time of the act giving rise to the cause of action.
(b) Any action brought under this section shall also comply with section 76-890.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
29
cases (
5 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case:
Durre v. Wilkinson Dev., 830 N.W.2d 72 (Neb. 2013).
Durre v. Wilkinson Dev., 830 N.W.2d 72 (Neb. 2013).
· cites it 22× “The district court sustained Tri-City’s motion for summary judgment, because the action was barred by the 10-year statute of repose in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-223 (Reissue 2008). The court also sustained Love Signs’ motion for sum- mary judgment, because the court found there was…”
Andres v. McNeil Co., Inc., 707 N.W.2d 777 (Neb. 2005).
· cites it 15× “However, because we conclude that a genuine issue as to a material fact remains concerning whether McNeil fraudulently concealed pertinent information, thereby preventing appellant from gaining timely knowledge about allegedly defective construction of the home within the 4-year…”
McCaulley v. C L Enters., 309 Neb. 141 (Neb. 2021).
· cites it 27× “The limitations period in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-223 (Reissue 2016) applies to defective construction claims brought against contractors and builders, whether such claims are based on negligence or breach of warranty.”
de Vries v. L & L Custom Builders, 968 N.W.2d 64 (Neb. 2021).
· cites it 11× “Where the basis of the claim is improper workmanship resulting in defective construction, under either negligence or breach of the implied warranty to perform in a workmanlike manner, the statute of limitations of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-223 (Reissue 2016) runs from the date of…”
Georgetowne Ltd. P'ship v. Geotechnical Servs., Inc., 430 N.W.2d 34 (Neb. 1988).
· cites it 14× “Plaintiff assigns as error that the court erred in (1) determining that the commencement date for the running of the statute of limitations was April 27, 1983, rather than June 8, 1983, and (2) determining that the appropriate statute of limitations was § 25-222, instead of Neb.…”
Grand Island Sch. Dist. 2 v. Celotex Corp., 279 N.W.2d 603 (Neb. 1979).
· cites it 10× “Section 25-223, R. S. Supp., 1978, provides, in part: “Any action to recover damages based on any alleged breach of warranty on improvements to real property or based on any alleged deficiency in the design, planning, supervision, or observation of construction, or construction…”
Witherspoon v. Sides Const. Co., Inc., 362 N.W.2d 35 (Neb. 1985).
· cites it 8× “Whether pled in tort or contract, the applicable period of repose is found in Neb. Rev.Stat. § 25-223 (Reissue 1979). See Kearney Clinic Bldg.”
Ag Valley Co-op v. Servinsky Engr., 974 N.W.2d 324 (Neb. 2022).
· cites it 14× “Claims of defective construction brought against builders and contractors are governed by the limitations periods set out in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-223 (Reissue 2016), whether the claims are based on theories of contract, tort, fraud, or breach of warranty.”
Murphy v. Spelts-Schultz Lumber Co., 481 N.W.2d 422 (Neb. 1992).
· cites it 6× “§ 25-222 (Reissue 1989), and an action based on “deficiency in the design, planning, supervision, or observation of construction, or construction of an improvement to real property shall be commenced within four years after any alleged act or omission,” Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-223…”
Williams v. Kingery Constr. Co., 404 N.W.2d 32 (Neb. 1987).
· cites it 9× “Williams now appeals to this court, maintaining that the district court erred (1) in finding that § 25-223 was constitutional and applicable to the particular facts of this case, thereby entitling Kingery to a judgment as a matter of law, and (2) in finding that § 25-222 was…”
Bd. of Regents of the Univ. of Nebraska v. Lueder Constr. Co., 433 N.W.2d 485 (Neb. 1988).
· cites it 6× “After a trial to the court on that issue, the district court for Douglas County held that the “action was brought more than two years after the existence of facts which would have, if pursued, led to the discovery of [the University’s] causes of action” and was, therefore,…”
Adams v. Manchester Park, 291 Neb. 978 (Neb. 2015).
· cites it 24× “Where the basis of a claim is improper workmanship resulting in defective construction, the Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-223 (Reissue 2008) statute of limitations runs from the date of substantial comple- tion of the project, not the date of any specific act which resulted in the defect.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-223(1) — 2 cases
de Vries v. L & L Custom Builders, 968 N.W.2d 64 (Neb. 2021).
“Where the basis of the claim is improper workmanship resulting in defective construction, under either negligence or breach of the implied warranty to perform in a workmanlike manner, the statute of limitations of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-223 (Reissue 2016) runs from the date of…”
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.