Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-180 (2026)

Findings, order, award, or judgment; modification; effect

✓ current as of July 2026

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

The Nebraska Workers' Compensation Court may, on its own motion or on the motion of any party, modify or change its findings, order, award, or judgment at any time before appeal and within fourteen days after the date of such findings, order, award, or judgment. The time for appeal shall not be lengthened because of the modification or change unless the correction substantially changes the result of the award.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 21 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1958–2022 · leading case: Parks v. Hy-Vee, 307 Neb. 927 (Neb. 2020).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Parks v. Hy-Vee, 307 Neb. 927 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 23× “The compensation court later modified the further award upon Parks’ motion pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-180 (Cum. Supp. 2018).”

Carr v. Ganz, 26 Neb. Ct. App. 14 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 10× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-180 (Cum. Supp. 2016) provides the compensation court the ability to modify an order within 14 days of its entry.”

Walsh v. City of Omaha, 660 N.W.2d 187 (Neb. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 9× “*751 § 48-180 (Reissue 1998), asking the review panel to change its finding that Walsh had withdrawn his assignment of error regarding waiting-time penalties and arguing that he did not withdraw the assignment at oral argument.”

Fay v. Dowding, Dowding & Dowding, 623 N.W.2d 287 (Neb. 2001). · cites it 10× “Section 48-180 provides that the Nebraska Workers’ Compensation Court may, “on its own motion, modify or change its findings, order, award, or judgment at any time before appeal and within ten days from the date of such findings, order, award, or judgment for the purpose of…”

Green v. Drivers Mgmt., Inc., 639 N.W.2d 94 (Neb. 2002). · cites it 5× “Since the order nunc pro tunc in the case at hand is not related to an increase or decrease in Green’s incapacity, we look to § 48-180. Section 48-180 provides that the compensation court may, “on its own motion, modify or change its findings, order, award, or judgment at any…”

Smith v. Fremont Contract Carriers, Inc., 358 N.W.2d 211 (Neb. 1984). · cites it 6× “ntive in nature and therefore not applicable to this situation; (2) The plaintiff was not entitled to these benefits because a reasonable controversy existed; and (3) The court had no jurisdiction to entertain such a motion because, after rehearing, the compensation court may…”

Cruz-Morales v. Swift Beef Co., 746 N.W.2d 698 (Neb. 2008). · cites it 4× “Following entry of the court's order, Swift Beef moved for an order (1) correcting a patent error in the default judgment and award under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 48-180 (Reissue 2004) or, in the alternative, (2) vacating the default judgment order.”

Thach v. Quality Pork Int'l, 570 N.W.2d 830 (Neb. 1997). · cites it 3× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-180 (Reissue 1993). These sections of the Act are clear that if the court fails to modify its order within 10 days and the parties fail to file an application for review within 14 days of the original order, such order becomes final and binding upon the…”

Sheldon-Zimbelman v. Bryan Mem'l Hosp., 604 N.W.2d 396 (Neb. 2000). · cites it 3× “The Nebraska Workers’ Compensation Act, in § 48-180, provides that the Workers’ Compensation Court may “modify or change its findings, order, award, or judgment .”

Black v. Sioux City Foundry Co., 401 N.W.2d 679 (Neb. 1987). · cites it 3× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-180 (Reissue 1984) provides: “The Nebraska Workmen’s Compensation Court may, on its own motion, modify or change its findings, order, award or judgment at any time before appeal and within ten days from the date of such findings, order, award or judgment for…”

Spratt v. Crete Carrier Corp., 311 Neb. 262 (Neb. 2022). · cites it 2× “Statutory Authority Spratt first assigns that the compensation court erred in find- ing that it did not have the statutory authority to modify the 20 See Gray v.”

Dougherty v. Swift-Eckrich, Inc., 557 N.W.2d 31 (Neb. 1996). · cites it 2× “Neither does Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-180 (Reissue 1993) apply to the situation at hand.”

Show all 21 citing cases →

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.