Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 52
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 52-1301 (2026)

Legislative intent

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

It is the intent of the Legislature to adopt a central filing system for security interests relating to farm products pursuant to section 1324 of the Food Security Act of 1985, Public Law 99-198. It is also the intent of the Legislature that upon the adoption of the central filing system that security interest holders be encouraged to use such system in lieu of any other notice provided by section 1324 for farm products produced or located in the State of Nebraska which are included in the central filing system.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1990–2014 · leading case: Battle Creek State Bank v. Preusker, 571 N.W.2d 294 (Neb. 1997).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Battle Creek State Bank v. Preusker, 571 N.W.2d 294 (Neb. 1997). · cites it 6× “However, the bank had failed to list milk on a “Nebraska Effective Financing Statement” that was filed pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 52-1301 through 52-1321 (Reissue 1988).”
Battle Creek State Bank v. Haake, 587 N.W.2d 83 (Neb. 1998). · cites it 6× “filing, or the buyer has, within 1 year preceding the sale of the farm products, received from the seller or secured party of the secured interest in the farm products written notice, including specific information about the debtor, and a reasonable description of the farm…”
Lisco State Bank v. McCombs Ranches, Inc., 752 F. Supp. 329 (D. Neb. 1990). · cites it 5× “In the alternative, the plaintiff also argues that the Nebraska enabling legislation, Neb.Rev.Stat. § 52-1301 et seq. (Reissue 1988), enacted in response to the Food Security Act, includes a good faith requirement which was breached by the defendants.”
Fed. Deposit Ins. v. Bowles Livestock Comm'n Co., 739 F. Supp. 1364 (D. Neb. 1990). · cites it 6× “See Neb. Rev.Stat. §§ 52-1301, et seq. Accordingly, Bowles will be liable to the FDIC for sales occurring subsequent to December 23, 1986, if the provisions of either § 1631(g)(2)(C) or § 1631(g)(2)(D) have been met.”
Skane, Inc. v. First Nat'l Bank of Omaha (In Re Damrow Cattle Co.), 300 B.R. 479 (Bankr. D. Neb. 2003). · cites it 5× “Skane had not registered with Nebraska’s central filing system for security interests in farm products pursuant to Neb.Rev.Stat. § 52-1301 et seq. 18. The majority of Damrow Cattle sales were made to purchasers who paid with joint-payee checks.”
Ag Servs. of Am., Inc. v. United Grain, Inc., 75 F. Supp. 2d 1037 (D. Neb. 1999). · cites it 3× “be implied or otherwise result, nor shall a security interest in farm products be considered to be waived, modified, released, or terminated, from any course of conduct, course of performance, or course of dealing between the parties or by any trade usage in any case in which:…”
Farm Credit Servs. v. Cargill, Inc. (8th Cir. 2014). “”); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 52-1301 et seq. (establishing Nebraska’s central filing system).”
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.