Nebraska Revised Statutes
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2601 (2026)
Act, how cited
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sections 25-2601 to 25-2622 shall be known and may be cited as the Uniform Arbitration Act.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1989–2024 · leading case: Cullinane v. Beverly Enters.-Neb., Inc., 300 Neb. 210 (Neb. 2018).
Cullinane v. Beverly Enters.-Neb., Inc., 300 Neb. 210 (Neb. 2018). “Nebraska has adopted the Uniform Arbitration Act (UAA), which is codified in Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-2601 to 25-2622 (Reissue 2016).”
Pearce v. Mut. of Omaha Ins. Co., 293 Neb. 277 (Neb. 2016). “1 Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-2601 to 25-2622 (Reissue 2008 & Cum.”
Wilczewski v. Charter West Nat. Bank, 889 N.W.2d 63 (Neb. 2016). “District Court’s Order After the evidentiary hearing, the district court sustained Charter’s motion to compel arbitration. The court noted the strong public policy in favor of arbitration and construed the arbitration clause broadly.”
Garlock v. 3DS Props., L. L.C., 303 Neb. 521 (Neb. 2019). “2 Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-2601 to 25-2622 (Reissue 2016).”
State v. Henderson, 762 N.W.2d 1 (Neb. 2009). “In summary, while I disagree with many of the arbitrator's factual findings and legal conclusions and share the majority's revulsion toward Henderson's affiliation with the Knights Party and everything that organization stands for, I cannot conclude that the award of…”
Seldin v. Est. of Silverman, 305 Neb. 185 (Neb. 2020). “11 The district court determined that the issues presented in this case were governed by the FAA. We agree.”
Aramark Unif. & Career Apparel, Inc. v. Hunan, Inc., 757 N.W.2d 205 (Neb. 2008). “" [37] Because the FAA governs the service contract, we must yield to the precedent set by the Court's holding in Doctor's Associates, Inc.”
Cornhusker Int'l Trucks, Inc. v. Thomas Built Buses, Inc., 637 N.W.2d 876 (Neb. 2002). “See Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-2601 to 25-2622 (Reissue 1995 & Cum.”
Hartman v. City of Grand Island, 657 N.W.2d 641 (Neb. 2003). “The city’s first assignment of error concerns the refusal of the district court to invalidate the award based upon the fact that it was signed by only one of the three arbitrators.”
Boyd v. Cook, 298 Neb. 819 (Neb. 2018). “37 Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 25-2601 to 25-2622 (Reissue 2016).”
Cinatl v. Prososki, 307 Neb. 477 (Neb. 2020). “Cinatl filed an appeal within 30 days of the September 2019 order confirming the arbitration award, and there is no dispute we have jurisdiction to consider that order.”
Millennium Solutions, Inc. v. Davis, 603 N.W.2d 406 (Neb. 1999). “ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR Davis assigns as error that the district court erred in finding that the predispute binding arbitration clause contained in the contract between the parties was void as against public policy and in failing to find that the Uniform Arbitration Act, Neb.”
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.