Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-349 (2026)

Dissolution; action; conditions

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

No action for dissolution of marriage may be brought unless at least one of the parties has had actual residence in this state with a bona fide intention of making this state his or her permanent home for at least one year prior to the filing of the complaint, or unless the marriage was solemnized in this state and either party has resided in this state from the time of marriage to filing the complaint. Persons serving in the armed forces of the United States who have been continuously stationed at any military base or installation in this state for one year or, if the marriage was solemnized in this state, have resided in this state from the time of marriage to the filing of the complaint shall for the purposes of sections 42-347 to 42-381 be deemed residents of this state.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1974–2022 · leading case: Metzler v. Metzler, 25 Neb. Ct. App. 757 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Metzler v. Metzler, 25 Neb. Ct. App. 757 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 6× “§ 42-349 (Reissue 2016) provides as follows: No action for dissolution of marriage may be brought unless at least one of the parties has had actual residence in this state with a bona fide intention of making this state his or her permanent home for at least one year prior to…”

Huffman v. Huffman, 441 N.W.2d 899 (Neb. 1989). · cites it 9× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-349 (Reissue 1988) (dissolution; action; conditions).”

Lasu v. Lasu, 28 Neb. Ct. App. 478 (Neb. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 5× “[9-13] Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-349 (Reissue 2016), in order to maintain an action for divorce in Nebraska, one of the parties must have “had actual residence in this state with a bona fide intention of making this state his or her permanent home for at least one year…”

Rozsnyai v. Svacek, 723 N.W.2d 329 (Neb. 2006). · cites it 3× “§ 42-349 (Reissue 2004) provides that in order to maintain an action for divorce in Nebraska, one of the parties must have had “actual residence in this state with a bona-fide intention of making this state his or her permanent home for at least one year prior to the filing of…”

Bleich v. Bleich, 981 N.W.2d 801 (Neb. 2022). · cites it 5× “Dissolution actions have dura- tional residency requirements, set out in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-349 (Reissue 2016), which must be met in order to confer subject matter jurisdiction.”

Wagner v. Wagner, 749 N.W.2d 137 (Neb. 2008). · cites it 2× “[4] See Neb.Rev.Stat. § 42-349 (Reissue 2004). [5] See Neb.”

Ashley v. Ashley, 217 N.W.2d 926 (Neb. 1974). · cites it 12× “Section 42-349, R.S.Supp., 1972, provides in part: "No action for dissolution of marriage may be brought unless at least one of the parties has had actual residence in this state with a bona fide intention of making this state his permanent home for at least one year prior to…”

Wymore v. Wymore, 479 N.W.2d 778 (Neb. 1992). · cites it 2× “In support of her motion, she alleged that neither party had resided in Nebraska for at least 1 year prior to the filing of the petition, as required by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-349 (Reissue 1988), and that she signed the voluntary appearance based on promises by the appellant that…”

Rector v. Rector, 401 N.W.2d 167 (Neb. 1987). · cites it 2× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-349 (Reissue 1984) provides in part: No action for dissolution of marriage may be brought unless at least one of the parties has had actual residence in this state with a bona fide intention of making this state his permanent home for at least one year prior…”

Metzler v. Metzler, 25 Neb. Ct. App. 757 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 8× “The language of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-349 (Reissue 2016) requiring an “actual residence in this state” means that one party is required to have a bona fide domicile in Nebraska for 1 year before commencement of a dissolu- tion action.”

Catlett v. Catlett (Neb. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 13× “Satisfaction of the residency require- ment in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-349 (Reissue 2008) is required to con- fer subject matter jurisdiction on a district court hearing a dissolu- tion proceeding.”

McNulty v. NcNulty (Neb. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 5× “” In the present case, both parties had a Nebraska domicile for 1 year prior to the filing of the complaint, thus meeting the requirement of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-349 (Reissue 2016). Section 42-349 having been met, the dissolution action could be commenced in the county where one…”

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.