Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2805 (2026)

Trial without jury; transfer to county court; fee; jury demand; timeframe

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

All matters in the Small Claims Court shall be tried to the court without a jury. Except as provided in section 25-2618.01, any defendant in an action or such defendant's attorney may transfer the case to the regular docket of the county court by giving notice to the court at least two days prior to the time set for the hearing. Upon such notice the case shall be transferred to the regular docket of the county court. The party causing the transfer of a case from the Small Claims Court to the regular docket shall pay as a fee the difference between the fee for filing a claim in Small Claims Court and the fee for filing a claim on the regular docket.

In any action transferred to the regular docket, there shall be no motions challenging pleadings unless ordered by the court upon a showing that any such procedure is necessary to the prompt and just determination of the action. In any action transferred to the regular docket, a defendant shall file an answer. Any jury demand in cases transferred from the Small Claims Court to county court shall be made within the timeframes provided in section 25-2705.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1998–2024 · leading case: Dollison v. Mercy Servs. Corp., 584 N.W.2d 674 (Neb. Ct. App. 1998).
Dollison v. Mercy Servs. Corp., 584 N.W.2d 674 (Neb. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 24× “Mercy Services transferred the case to the county court pursuant to Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-2805 (Reissue 1995). Thereafter, Dollison filed an amended petition, which included a "Demand for Jury Trial.”
Dept. of Health & Human Serv. v. Weekley, 741 N.W.2d 658 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 2× “[8] Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-2805 (Cum.Supp.2006). [9] Neb.”
Hara v. Reichert, 287 Neb. 577 (Neb. 2014). · cites it 2× “See, also, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2806 (Reissue 2008).”
Henriksen v. Gleason, 643 N.W.2d 652 (Neb. 2002). “For example, the jurisdiction of small claims court is currently limited to those cases where the amount in controversy does not exceed $2,400, § 25-2802(4); parties are not represented by counsel, § 25-2803; matters are tried without a jury, § 25-2805; few formal pleadings are…”
Hayes v. Applegarth, 631 N.W.2d 547 (Neb. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2807 (Cum. Supp. 2000) provides, in reference to a party appealing from a *354 small claims court decision, that “any party may appeal to the district court as provided in sections 25-2728 to 25-2738.”
Sedighi v. Schnackel Engineers, 317 Neb. 890 (Neb. 2024). · cites it 2× “15 Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2805 (Reissue 2016).”
Gibbons v. Don Williams Roofing, Inc., 623 N.W.2d 662 (Neb. 2001). · cites it 6× “” Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2805 (Cum. Supp. 2000) provides: [A]ny defendant in an action or such defendant’s attorney may transfer the case to the regular docket of the county court by giving notice to the court at least two days prior to the time set for the hearing.”
Nebraska Dep't of Health & Human Servs. v. Weekley, 741 N.W.2d 658 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2803 (2) (Reissue 1995).”
Eborka v. Wayne State Coll. (D. Neb. 2024). · cites it 2× “On August 31, 2023, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-2805 , the College timely transferred Mr.”
Hensley v. Peterson (Neb. Ct. App. 2024). “For example, the jurisdiction of small claims court is currently limited to those cases where the amount in controversy does not exceed $6,000, although at all times relevant to this matter, the limit was $3,900, § 25-2802(4); parties are not represented by counsel, § 25-2803;…”
Mbna Am. Bank, Na v. Hansen, 745 N.W.2d 609 (Neb. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “It further provides that a controversy submitted to the small claims court under this section shall not be transferred to the regular docket of the county court under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-2805 (Cum.Supp.2006). See § 25-2618.”
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.