Any action, other than the actions mentioned in sections 25-401 to 25-403, may be brought (1) in the county where any defendant resides, (2) in the county where the cause of action arose, (3) in the county where the transaction or some part of the transaction occurred out of which the cause of action arose, or (4) if all defendants are nonresidents of this state, in any county. When an action has been commenced in any other county, the court in which the action has been commenced shall have jurisdiction over the action, but upon timely motion by a defendant, the court shall transfer the action to the proper court in a county in which such action might have been properly commenced. The court in the county to which the action is transferred, in its discretion, may order the plaintiff or the plaintiff's attorney to pay to the defendant all reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the defendant because of the improper venue or in proceedings to transfer the action.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1988–2021 · leading case:
Wilson v. Misko, 508 N.W.2d 238 (Neb. 1993).
Wilson v. Misko, 508 N.W.2d 238 (Neb. 1993).
· cites it 4× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 25-403.01 (Reissue 1989) provides: Any action, other than actions mentioned in sections 25-401 to 25-403, may be brought (1) in the county where any defendant resides, (2) in the county where the cause of action arose, (3) in the county where the transaction or…”
Blitzkie v. State, 422 N.W.2d 773 (Neb. 1988).
· cites it 3× “*777 § 25-403.01 (Cum.Supp.1986) concerning a change of venue in transitory tort actions, and still another statute for transfer of a civil action for "the convenience of the parties and witnesses or in the interest of justice," Neb.”
Cmty. First State Bank v. Olsen, 587 N.W.2d 364 (Neb. 1998).
· cites it 2× “Because we find that the trial court acted within its discretion in sustaining the motion under § 25-410, we need not address whether venue was initially proper under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.01 (Reissue 1995).”
Buzek v. Pawnee Cnty., Nebraska, 207 F. Supp. 2d 961 (D. Neb. 2002).
· cites it 4× “By permitting a citizen suit to be brought in the plaintiffs county of residence, section 84-1414(3) is more expansive than the general venue statute, Neb.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 25-403.01 (Michie 1995).”
Damrow v. Murdoch, 739 N.W.2d 229 (Neb. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 6× “” Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.01 (Reissue 1995) contains the general provisions with respect to venue in civil cases brought in Nebraska courts.”
Burns v. Burns, 296 Neb. 184 (Neb. 2017).
· cites it 2× “6 Here, Kerry is not questioning whether the place of trial action was proper under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.01 (Reissue 2016); instead, she questions Judge Doyle’s authority in this case to order her to appear outside Adams County and to hold an evidentiary hearing outside…”
Jacobo v. Zoltenko, 30 Neb. Ct. App. 44 (Neb. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 3× “) Counsel alleged that, pur- suant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-403.01 (Reissue 2016), the court did have jurisdiction to enter the ex parte protection order or set the matter for hearing.”
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.