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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-705 (2026)

Rule 705. Disclosure of facts or data underlying expert opinion

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

The expert may testify in terms of opinion or inference and give reasons therefor without prior disclosure of the underlying facts or data, unless the judge requires otherwise. The expert may in any event be required to disclose the underlying facts or data on cross-examination.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases, 1978–2013 · leading case: Heistand v. Heistand, 673 N.W.2d 541 (Neb. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Heistand v. Heistand, 673 N.W.2d 541 (Neb. 2004). · cites it 2× “§ 27-702 (Reissue 1995), provides that “[i]f scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education,…”
Clearwater Corp. v. City of Lincoln, 277 N.W.2d 236 (Neb. 1979). · cites it 5× “1943, an expert witness may “give his reasons” at the time he is allowed to testify as to his opinion, but he is not required to testify to “the underlying facts or data” before stating his opinion unless the trial court requires otherwise.”
State v. Pangborn, 836 N.W.2d 790 (Neb. 2013). · cites it 2× “705, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-705 (Reissue 2008). 50 Sack v.”
Rankin v. Stetson, 749 N.W.2d 460 (Neb. 2008). · cites it 2× “705, Neb.Rev. Stat. § 27-705 (Reissue 1995). It also held that Brown did not qualify to give his opinion under Neb.”
City of Lincoln v. Realty Trust Grp., Inc., 705 N.W.2d 432 (Neb. 2005). · cites it 2× “” Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat § 27-705 (Reissue 1995), “an expert’s opinion is ordinarily admissible if the witness (1) qualifies as an expert, (2) has an opinion that will assist the trier of fact, (3) states his or her opinion, and (4) is prepared to disclose the basis of that…”
Tank v. Peterson, 363 N.W.2d 530 (Neb. 1985). · cites it 4× “*453 Furthermore, although Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-705 (1) (Reissue 1979) begins, “The expert may testify in terms of opinion or inference and give his reasons therefor without prior disclosure of the underlying facts or data,” it continues, “The expert may in any event be required…”
Priest v. McConnell, 363 N.W.2d 173 (Neb. 1985). · cites it 4× “In the absence of judicial request for underlying facts or data, a witness found by the court to be qualified as an expert may, without any further development of facts, express an opinion in the field wherein the witness has expertise.”
Boyle v. Welsh, 589 N.W.2d 118 (Neb. 1999). · cites it 2× “Likewise, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-705 (Reissue 1995), an expert “is not required to testify to ‘the underlying facts or data’ before stating his opinion.”
Gittins v. Scholl, 601 N.W.2d 765 (Neb. 1999). · cites it 6× “Finally, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-705 (Reissue 1995) permits admission of an expert opinion without prior disclosure of the underlying facts upon which the expert’s opinion is based.”
Gordman Props. Co. v. Bd. of Equalization, 403 N.W.2d 366 (Neb. 1987). · cites it 2× “” Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-705 (Reissue 1985). Through McDannel’s testimony about the tax valuation of agricultural land, Gordman established a prima facie case that the valuations for agricultural land and Gordman’s real estate were not uniform and proportionate in 1984, as…”
State v. Hankins, 441 N.W.2d 854 (Neb. 1989). · cites it 2× “Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-705 (Reissue 1985), an expert can be required to disclose on cross-examination the facts or data underlying his or her opinion.”
Clearwater Corp. v. City of Lincoln, 301 N.W.2d 328 (Neb. 1981). · cites it 5× “The appellant argues on appeal that it is error for the trial court to refuse to permit an expert witness the *753 opportunity to state facts upon which he bases his opinion, citing Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-705 (Reissue 1979). Clearwater further argues that where the value of real…”
Show all 24 citing cases →
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-705(1) — 2 cases
Tank v. Peterson, 363 N.W.2d 530 (Neb. 1985). “*453 Furthermore, although Neb. Rev. Stat. § 27-705 (1) (Reissue 1979) begins, “The expert may testify in terms of opinion or inference and give his reasons therefor without prior disclosure of the underlying facts or data,” it continues, “The expert may in any event be required…”
Priest v. McConnell, 363 N.W.2d 173 (Neb. 1985). “In the absence of judicial request for underlying facts or data, a witness found by the court to be qualified as an expert may, without any further development of facts, express an opinion in the field wherein the witness has expertise.”
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.