Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 49
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 49-101 (2026)

Common law; applicability

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

So much of the common law of England as is applicable and not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, with the organic law of this state, or with any law passed or to be passed by the Legislature of this state, is adopted and declared to be law within the State of Nebraska.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 54 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1931–2026 · leading case: State v. Hessler, 886 N.W.2d 280 (Neb. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Hessler, 886 N.W.2d 280 (Neb. 2016). · cites it 4× “Judgments: Evidence: Appeal and Error. The purpose of the writ of error coram nobis is to bring before the court rendering judgment matters of fact which, if known at the time the judgment was rendered, would have prevented its rendition.”
Gourley Ex Rel. Gourley v. Nebraska Methodist Health Sys., Inc., 663 N.W.2d 43 (Neb. 2003). · cites it 4× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 49-101 (Reissue 1998). Thus it exists here by legislative enactment and may be repealed.”
State v. El-Tabech, 610 N.W.2d 737 (Neb. 2000). · cites it 4× “The common-law writ of error coram nobis exists in this state under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 49-101 (Reissue 1998). See, Parker v.”
Imig v. March, 279 N.W.2d 382 (Neb. 1979). · cites it 4× “Essentially, plaintiff argues that the doctrine of interspousal tort immunity is of judicial origin and this court has the power to modify or abolish it in the absence of legislative action to the contrary.”
State v. Lotter, 664 N.W.2d 892 (Neb. 2003). · cites it 2× “The common-law writ of error coram nobis exists in this state under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 49-101 (Reissue 1998), which adopts English common law to the extent that it is not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, the organic law of this state, or any law passed by…”
United States v. Jorge Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541 (5th Cir. 2013). “§ 1-1-109; Neb.Rev.Stat. § 49-101; S.C.Code Ann. § 14-1-50; Tex.”
Brown v. City of Omaha, 160 N.W.2d 805 (Neb. 1968). · cites it 4× “Section 49-101, R.R.S.1943, provides: "So much of the common law of England as is applicable and not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, with the organic law of this state, or with any law passed or to be passed by the Legislature of this state, is adopted…”
Noland v. Yost, 998 N.W.2d 57 (Neb. 2023). · cites it 2× “See, also, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 49-101 (Reissue 2021) (adopting “common law of England” as Nebraska law to extent not inconsistent with U.”
Lyle Stoneman v. United Nebraska Bank, 577 N.W.2d 271 (Neb. 1998). · cites it 2× “V, § 9; Neb. Rev. Stat. § 49-101 (Reissue 1993). To the extent § 21-20,138 is an adequate remedy, equity does not apply, Pilot Investment Group v.”
Hall v. Progress Pig, Inc., 575 N.W.2d 369 (Neb. 1998). · cites it 4× “252, 255 , 231 N.W.2d 345, 348 (1975). Here, the common-law rules regarding standing are inconsistent with the provisions of article XII, § 8, which confers upon the citizens of Nebraska standing to seek judicial enforcement of that constitutional provision if the Attorney…”
Carlsen v. State, 261 N.W. 339 (Neb. 1935). · cites it 6× “” This statute has never been repealed and is now section 49-101, Comp. St. 1929. The legislature by the adoption of the Revised Statutes of 1866 made a further declaration, as follows: “If a case ever arise in which an action for the enforcement or protection of a right," or…”
Wright v. Barclay, 36 N.W.2d 645 (Neb. 1949). · cites it 4× “Section 49-101, Comp. St. 1929, is now section 49-101, R.”
Show all 54 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.