Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-1420 (2026)

Franchise; termination; noncontinuance; change community; hearing; when required

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

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) or (3) of this section, no franchisor shall terminate or refuse to continue any franchise or change a franchisee's community unless the franchisor has first established, in a hearing held pursuant to section 60-1425, that:

(a) The franchisor has good cause for termination, noncontinuance, or change;

(b) Upon termination or noncontinuance, another franchise in the same line-make will become effective in the same community, without diminution of the franchisee's service formerly provided, or that the community cannot be reasonably expected to support such a dealership; and

(c) Upon termination or noncontinuance, the franchisor is willing and able to comply with section 60-1430.02.

(2) Upon providing good and sufficient evidence to the board, a franchisor may terminate a franchise without such hearing (a) for a particular line-make if the franchisor discontinues that line-make, (b) if the franchisee's license as a motor vehicle, combination motor vehicle and trailer, motorcycle, or trailer dealer is revoked pursuant to the Motor Vehicle Industry Regulation Act, or (c) upon a mutual written agreement of the franchisor and franchisee.

(3) A franchisor may change a franchisee's community without a hearing if the franchisor notifies the franchisee of the proposed change at least thirty days before the change, provides the franchisee an opportunity to object, and enters into an agreement with the franchisee regarding the change of the franchisee's community. If no agreement is reached, the franchisor shall comply with sections 60-1420 to 60-1435 prior to changing the franchisee's community.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1975–2002 · leading case: Cornhusker Int'l Trucks, Inc. v. Thomas Built Buses, Inc., 637 N.W.2d 876 (Neb. 2002).
Cornhusker Int'l Trucks, Inc. v. Thomas Built Buses, Inc., 637 N.W.2d 876 (Neb. 2002). · cites it 5× “, we did not consider whether the FAA preempted § 60-1420. Chrysler’s declaratory judgment action challenged the constitutionality of certain provisions of the motor vehicle industry licensing statutes.”
Chrysler Motors Corp. v. Lee Janseen Motor Co., 534 N.W.2d 309 (Neb. 1995). · cites it 22× “The court found that the hearing provisions of Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 60-1420 to 60-1435 (Reissue 1993) were not contrary to the due process guarantees of the Nebraska or U.”
Bose Equip., Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 535 N.W.2d 404 (Neb. 1995). · cites it 6× “In March 1991, Ford filed an application with the board to terminate the franchise agreement pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-1420 (Reissue 1993).”
Garber v. State, 489 N.W.2d 550 (Neb. 1992). · cites it 3× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-1420 (1) (Reissue 1988) provides that, except under conditions not present in this case, no franchisor shall terminate or refuse to continue any *524 franchise unless the franchisor has first established, in a hearing.”
Am. Motors Sales Corp. v. Perkins, 251 N.W.2d 727 (Neb. 1977). · cites it 3× “On March 27, 1975, the board entered an order finding it had jurisdiction and denied the application for failure of AMSC to establish good cause for termination, as required by section 60-1420, R. R. S. 1943. Pursuant to section 84-917, R.”
Chrysler Corp. v. Lee Janssen Motor Co., 619 N.W.2d 78 (Neb. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 6× “Janssen argues that the district court erred in reversing the findings and order of the Board and granting Chrysler’s applica *732 tion to terminate Janssen’s franchise pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-1420 (Reissue 1993).”
Dunne Leases Cars & Trucks, Inc. v. Kenworth Truck Co., 466 A.2d 1153 (R.I. 1983). “§ 42-133f(a) (1978); Neb. Rev.Stat. §§ 60-1420 and 60-1433 (1943); Wash.”
Becker v. Crown Cent. Petroleum Corp., 340 A.2d 324 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1975). “17 (1974); Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 60-1420 to 60-1435 (1974); N.”
Chrysler Motors Corp. v. Nebraska Motor Veh. Indus. Linensing Bd., 274 N.W.2d 862 (Neb. 1979). “In this proceeding to terminate the franchise of a motor vehicle dealer, pursuant to sections 60-1420 to 60-1435, R. R. S. 1943, the franchisor has the burden to prove both good cause for termination and that upon termination another franchise in the same line-make will become…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-1420(1) — 2 cases
Cornhusker Int'l Trucks, Inc. v. Thomas Built Buses, Inc., 637 N.W.2d 876 (Neb. 2002). “, we did not consider whether the FAA preempted § 60-1420. Chrysler’s declaratory judgment action challenged the constitutionality of certain provisions of the motor vehicle industry licensing statutes.”
Garber v. State, 489 N.W.2d 550 (Neb. 1992). “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 60-1420 (1) (Reissue 1988) provides that, except under conditions not present in this case, no franchisor shall terminate or refuse to continue any *524 franchise unless the franchisor has first established, in a hearing.”
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.