Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 59
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 59-1603 (2026)

Contracts, combinations, conspiracies in restraint of trade; unlawful

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

Any contract, combination, in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce shall be unlawful.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: Salem Grain Co. v. Consol. Grain & Barge Co., 297 Neb. 682 (Neb. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Salem Grain Co. v. Consol. Grain & Barge Co., 297 Neb. 682 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 5× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 59-1603 (Reissue 2010) is construed in accord­ ance with 15 U.”
Kanne v. Visa U.S.A. Inc., 723 N.W.2d 293 (Neb. 2006). · cites it 3× “§§ 59-801 to 59-831 (Reissue 2004) and Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 59-1603 to 59-1609 (Reissue 2004) of the Consumer Protection Act.”
State Ex Rel. Douglas v. Associated Grocers of Nebraska Coop., Inc., 332 N.W.2d 690 (Neb. 1983). · cites it 2× “The State brought action under the state version of the Sherman Antitrust Act.”
Ellison Educ. Equip., Inc. v. Accu-Cut Sys., Inc., 769 F. Supp. 1090 (D. Neb. 1991). · cites it 2× “Further, Neb.Rev.Stat. § 59-1603 provides that “[a]ny contract, combination, in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy in restraint of trade or commerce shall be unlawful.”
Gaver v. Schneider's O.K. Tire Co., 289 Neb. 491 (Neb. 2014). · cites it 2× ““However, while not favorites of the law, partial restraints are not deemed to be unenforcible when they are ancillary to a contract of employment and are apparently necessary to afford fair protection to the employer.”
State Ex Rel. Stenberg v. Am. Midlands, Inc., 509 N.W.2d 633 (Neb. 1994). · cites it 4× “Section 59-1614 states in relevant part: Any person who violates section 59-1603 or 59-1604 or the terms of any injunction issued as provided in sections 59-1601 to 59-1622, shall forfeit and pay a civil penalty of not more than twenty-five thousand dollars.”
The Walling Co. LLC v. Kesterson (D. Neb. 2025). · cites it 3× “2d at 127; Neb. Rev. Stat. § 59-1603 . This factor favors the Defendants.”
Cabela's LLC v. Highby, 362 F. Supp. 3d 208 (2019). “" 2018 WL 5309954 , at *9 *220 (quoting Neb. Rev. Stat. § 59-1603 ). Further, also noted in Wellman , Cabela's fails to support its proposition that a "fundamental policy" must be enshrined in statute, as opposed to clearly expressed through the common law.”
Cabela's LLC v. Ryan Wellman (Del. Ch. 2018). · cites it 2× “2014); see also Neb. Rev. Stat. § 59-1603 . 98 Chambers-Dobson, Inc.”
Ordosgoitti v. Werner Enter., Inc. (D. Neb. 2021). “§ 59-1603 ). Addressing Ordosgoitti’s original Complaint asserting the same cause of action, the Court found that Ordosgoitti failed to state a claim under the CPA because he had not adequately alleged facts tending to show the public interest of the people of Nebraska was…”
Bassett v. Credit Bureau Servs., Inc. (D. Neb. 2021). “Section 59-1609 reads: Any person who is injured in his or her business or property by a violation of sections 59-1602 to 59-1606, whether such injured person dealt directly or indirectly with the defendant, or any person so injured because he or she refuses to accede to a…”
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.