Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 3
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 3-105 (2026)

Division; seal; rules and regulations; adopt

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

The division shall adopt a seal and adopt and promulgate rules and regulations for its administration. All rules, regulations, and orders of the Department of Aeronautics adopted prior to July 1, 2017, in connection with the powers, duties, and functions transferred to the Division of Aeronautics of the Department of Transportation pursuant to Laws 2017, LB339, shall continue to be effective until revised, amended, repealed, or nullified pursuant to law.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1949–2020 · leading case: Eagle Partners, L.L.C. v. Rook, 301 Neb. 947 (Neb. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Eagle Partners, L.L.C. v. Rook, 301 Neb. 947 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 4× “The comment to § 3-105 12 of the Uniform Probate Code indicates that the responsibility for hearing and deciding formal petitions is to be *107 assigned to the court of general jurisdiction of each county or district, further noting that there is "little basis for objection to…”
In re Application of O'Siochain, 287 Neb. 445 (Neb. 2014). · cites it 31× “On appeal, O’Siochain argues that when con- sidered as a whole, his education and experience merit waiver of the educational requirements in § 3-105. [3,4] After the denial of an application and a hearing before the Commission, this court will consider a waiver of §…”
In re Claims Against Pierce Elevator, 291 Neb. 798 (Neb. 2015). “§ 3-105 (Reissue 2001), “issue” is defined as “the first delivery of an instrument by the maker or drawer, whether to a holder or nonholder, for the purpose of giving rights on the instrument to any person.”
Eagle Partners v. Rook, 301 Neb. 947 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 3× “The comment to § 3-10512 of the Uniform Probate Code indi- cates that the responsibility for hearing and deciding formal petitions is to be assigned to the court of general jurisdiction of each county or district, further noting that there is “little basis for objection to the…”
State v. Pratt, 842 N.W.2d 800 (Neb. 2014). “CONCLUSION Based on a de novo review, we conclude that O’Siochain has met his burden of proving his law school education and experience were functionally equivalent to the educa- tion received at an ABA-approved law school and that as a result, a waiver of the educational…”
Sanitary & Improvement Dist. No. 32 v. Cont'l W. Corp., 343 N.W.2d 314 (Neb. 1983). · cites it 3× “§ 3-105 (Reissue 1980) has always provided in part: ‘‘(1) A promise or order otherwise unconditional is not made conditional by the fact that the instrument .”
In Re Est. of Kinsey, 40 N.W.2d 526 (Neb. 1949). “*110 Sections 3-105 and 3-110, R. S. Supp., 1949, gave the Nebraska Department of Aeronautics the power to adopt rules and regulations not inconsistent with the foregoing purposes, which rules and regulations “shall be kept in conformity, as nearly as may be, with the then…”
Prop. Ventures, LLC (Bankr. D. Neb. 2020). “A negotiable instrument must be issued, which is “the first delivery of an instrument by the maker or drawer, whether to a holder or nonholder, for the purpose of giving rights on the instrument to any person.”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 3-105(1): 1 case
Sanitary & Improvement Dist. No. 32 v. Cont'l W. Corp., 343 N.W.2d 314 (Neb. 1983). “§ 3-105 (Reissue 1980) has always provided in part: ‘‘(1) A promise or order otherwise unconditional is not made conditional by the fact that the instrument .”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 3-105(A): 1 case
In re Application of O'Siochain, 287 Neb. 445 (Neb. 2014). “On appeal, O’Siochain argues that when con- sidered as a whole, his education and experience merit waiver of the educational requirements in § 3-105. [3,4] After the denial of an application and a hearing before the Commission, this court will consider a waiver of §…”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 3-105(A)(1): 1 case
In re Application of O'Siochain, 287 Neb. 445 (Neb. 2014). “On appeal, O’Siochain argues that when con- sidered as a whole, his education and experience merit waiver of the educational requirements in § 3-105. [3,4] After the denial of an application and a hearing before the Commission, this court will consider a waiver of §…”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 3-105(A)(1)(a): 1 case
In re Application of O'Siochain, 287 Neb. 445 (Neb. 2014). “On appeal, O’Siochain argues that when con- sidered as a whole, his education and experience merit waiver of the educational requirements in § 3-105. [3,4] After the denial of an application and a hearing before the Commission, this court will consider a waiver of §…”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 3-105(A)(1)(b): 2 cases
In re Application of O'Siochain, 287 Neb. 445 (Neb. 2014). “On appeal, O’Siochain argues that when con- sidered as a whole, his education and experience merit waiver of the educational requirements in § 3-105. [3,4] After the denial of an application and a hearing before the Commission, this court will consider a waiver of §…”
State v. Pratt, 842 N.W.2d 800 (Neb. 2014). “CONCLUSION Based on a de novo review, we conclude that O’Siochain has met his burden of proving his law school education and experience were functionally equivalent to the educa- tion received at an ABA-approved law school and that as a result, a waiver of the educational…”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 3-105(A)(1)(c): 1 case
In re Application of O'Siochain, 287 Neb. 445 (Neb. 2014). “On appeal, O’Siochain argues that when con- sidered as a whole, his education and experience merit waiver of the educational requirements in § 3-105. [3,4] After the denial of an application and a hearing before the Commission, this court will consider a waiver of §…”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 3-105(C): 1 case
In re Application of O'Siochain, 287 Neb. 445 (Neb. 2014). “On appeal, O’Siochain argues that when con- sidered as a whole, his education and experience merit waiver of the educational requirements in § 3-105. [3,4] After the denial of an application and a hearing before the Commission, this court will consider a waiver 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.