Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-1104 (2026)

Unlawful employment practice for an employer

✓ current as of July 2026

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

It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer:

(1) To fail or refuse to hire, to discharge, or to harass any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, disability, marital status, national origin, or military or veteran status; or

(2) To limit, advertise, solicit, segregate, or classify employees in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive any individual of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect such individual's status as an employee, because of such individual's race, color, religion, sex, disability, marital status, national origin, or military or veteran status.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 73 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1971–2025 · leading case: Knapp v. Ruser, 297 Neb. 639 (Neb. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Knapp v. Ruser, 297 Neb. 639 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 7× “Knapp’s fifth claim was based on § 48-1104, which is part of the NFEPA and which provides as follows: It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer: (1) To fail or refuse to hire, to discharge, or to harass any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any…”

Goolsby v. Anderson, 549 N.W.2d 153 (Neb. 1996). · cites it 10× “Goolsby's third cause of action alleged that the appellees had deprived her of "her rights, privileges and immunities to be free from sexual harassment and discrimination as secured by the laws of the State of Nebraska, specifically Neb.Rev.Stat. § 48-1104." Goolsby's fourth…”

Trosper v. Bag 'N Save, 734 N.W.2d 704 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 4× “§§ 2000e, 2000e-2, 2000e-3, and 2000e-5 (2000); Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 48-1104 , 48-1108, 48-1111, and 48-1118 (Reissue 2004).”

Knapp v. Ruser, 145 F. Supp. 3d 846 (D. Neb. 2015). · cites it 4× “) While Defendants argue the claim is most logically examined under Title VII, Knapp cites to Neb.Rev.Stat. §§ 48-1104(1) and 48-1104(14) in her Brief in Opposition to Summary Judgment in support of Claim Seven.”

Hartley v. Metro. Util. Dist., 885 N.W.2d 675 (Neb. 2016). “” The NFEPA provides at § 48-1104(1), in relevant part, that “[i]t shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer .”

Airport Inn, Inc. v. Nebraska Equal Opportunity Comm'n, 353 N.W.2d 727 (Neb. 1984). · cites it 4× “Section 48-1104 provides: "It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer: (1) .”

Helvering v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 703 N.W.2d 134 (Neb. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “Section 48-1104(1) makes it unlawful for an employer to harass any individual because of sex, and § 48-1102(14) includes the creation of a hostile working environment as “[h]arass[ment] because of sex.”

IBP, Inc. v. Sands, 563 N.W.2d 353 (Neb. 1997). · cites it 5× “On December 28, 1992, Sands filed a charge of disability discrimination against IBP pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-1104 (1) and (2) (Reissue 1988) of the Nebraska Fair Employment Practice Act.”

City of Fort Calhoun v. Collins, 500 N.W.2d 822 (Neb. 1993). · cites it 4× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 48-1104 (Reissue 1988). "Employer" is defined as a "person engaged in an industry who has fifteen or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year.”

Edwards v. Hiland Roberts Dairy, Co., 860 F.3d 1121 (8th Cir. 2017). “Smith and Edwards subsequently filed actions against Hiland Dairy, alleging unlawful termination in violation of federal and state law.”

Bobbette Blake v. MJ Optical, 870 F.3d 820 (8th Cir. 2017). “§ 2000e-2(a)(1); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-1104 (1). Blake can defeat summary judgment by “producing] direct evidence of discrimination,” *826 or by “creat[ing] an inference of discrimination under the burden-shifting framework of McDonnell Douglas.”

Ranger Div., Ryder Truck Lines, Inc. v. Bayne, 333 N.W.2d 891 (Neb. 1983). · cites it 4× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 48-1104 (Reissue 1978) provides that it is an unlawful employment *894 practice for an employer to refuse to hire or otherwise discriminate against an individual because of such individual's disability.”

Show all 73 citing cases →

— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-1104(1) — 14 cases

Knapp v. Ruser, 145 F. Supp. 3d 846 (D. Neb. 2015). “) While Defendants argue the claim is most logically examined under Title VII, Knapp cites to Neb.Rev.Stat. §§ 48-1104(1) and 48-1104(14) in her Brief in Opposition to Summary Judgment in support of Claim Seven.”

Knapp v. Ruser, 297 Neb. 639 (Neb. 2017). “Knapp’s fifth claim was based on § 48-1104, which is part of the NFEPA and which provides as follows: It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer: (1) To fail or refuse to hire, to discharge, or to harass any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any…”

Hartley v. Metro. Util. Dist., 885 N.W.2d 675 (Neb. 2016). “” The NFEPA provides at § 48-1104(1), in relevant part, that “[i]t shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer .”

Helvering v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 703 N.W.2d 134 (Neb. Ct. App. 2005). “Section 48-1104(1) makes it unlawful for an employer to harass any individual because of sex, and § 48-1102(14) includes the creation of a hostile working environment as “[h]arass[ment] because of sex.”

Arens v. NEBCO, Inc., 291 Neb. 834 (Neb. 2015).

— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-1104(2) — 2 cases

Adams v. Tenneco Auto. Operating Co., Inc., 358 F. Supp. 2d 878 (D. Neb. 2005).

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.