Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 27
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-1006 (2026)

Rule 1006. Voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs; summaries; availability; orders

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

The contents of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs which cannot conveniently be examined in court may be presented in the form of a chart, summary, or calculation. The originals, or duplicates, shall be made available for examination or copying, or both, by other parties at a reasonable time and place. The judge may order that they be produced in court.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1976–2024 · leading case: 132 Ventures v. Active Spine Physical Therapy, 318 Neb. 64 (Neb. 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
132 Ventures v. Active Spine Physical Therapy, 318 Neb. 64 (Neb. 2024). · cites it 30× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-1006 (Reissue 2016) permits the use of charts, summaries, or calculations of the contents of volumi- nous writings, recordings, or photographs that cannot conveniently be examined in court, so long as the requirements of the statute are met.”
AVG Partners I v. Genesis Health Clubs, 307 Neb. 47 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 2× “Genesis additionally challenges the overruling of its objections to exhibits 117 and 123 based on improper foundation for a summary under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-1006 (Reissue 2016).”
All. Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. v. State Sur. Co., 390 N.W.2d 487 (Neb. 1986). · cites it 2× “We conclude that no substantial right of State Surety was unfairly prejudiced by admission of the documentary evidence in question, because other relevant evidence was admitted and showed the nature and extent of Arntt’s indebtedness to Alliance National.”
Crowder v. Aurora Co-Operative Elevator Co., 393 N.W.2d 250 (Neb. 1986). · cites it 2× “1006 ( Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-1006 (Reissue 1985)), which provides: The contents of .”
Korth v. Luther, 304 Neb. 450 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 2× “Atelier, Korth, Koukol, and Derr all assign as error, sum- marized, that the district court erred by (1) finding that the fraudulent transfer claims were frivolous and that frivolous pleading sanctions, including attorney fees, were appropriate and (2) receiving in evidence…”
Groenewold v. Bldgs. Movers, Inc., 247 N.W.2d 629 (Neb. 1976). · cites it 2× “Neither does section 27-1006, R. R. S. 1943, have any application for the exhibit was not a summary of voluminous documents.”
Ackerman v. Metro. Cmty. Coll. Area, 575 N.W.2d 181 (Neb. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “See, generally, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-1006 (Reissue 1995) (providing that summaries may be used to present contents of voluminous documents which cannot be'conveniently examined in court so long as underlying documents are made available to other parties).”
Hansen v. Lien Termite & Pest Control Co., 428 N.W.2d 195 (Neb. 1988). · cites it 2× “The document is not a summary of voluminous writings, but is Rudeen’s one-page estimate. Once he was questioned and qualified as an expert witness in the construction estimate field, Rudeen was competent to testify regarding the basis for his cost estimates.”
In re Trust of Bresel (Neb. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “SUMMARY EVIDENCE OF “SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS” Mack asserts that the county court erred in admitting exhibits 223 through 226 because they are improper summaries that were not admissible under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-1006 (Reissue 2008) (governing admission of summaries 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.