At any time within three months after any sale of property under a trust deed, as hereinabove provided, an action may be commenced to recover the balance due upon the obligation for which the trust deed was given as security, and in such action the complaint shall set forth the entire amount of the indebtedness which was secured by such trust deed and the amount for which such property was sold and the fair market value thereof at the date of sale, together with interest on such indebtedness from the date of sale, the costs and expenses of exercising the power of sale and of the sale. Before rendering judgment, the court shall find the fair market value at the date of sale of the property sold. The court shall not render judgment for more than the amount by which the amount of the indebtedness with interest and the costs and expenses of sale, including trustee's fees, exceeds the fair market value of the property or interest therein sold as of the date of the sale, and in no event shall the amount of said judgment, exclusive of interest from the date of sale, exceed the difference between the amount for which the property was sold and the entire amount of the indebtedness secured thereby, including said costs and expenses of sale.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
22
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case:
Doty v. West Gate Bank, 874 N.W.2d 839 (Neb. 2016).
Doty v. West Gate Bank, 874 N.W.2d 839 (Neb. 2016).
· cites it 46× “The running of the statute of limitations for an action under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 76-1013 (Reissue 2009) does not extinguish the balance due upon the underlying obligation.”
First Nat. Bank of Omaha v. Davey, 830 N.W.2d 63 (Neb. 2013).
· cites it 43× “A deficiency action brought after the judicial foreclosure of a trust deed is not governed by the 3-month statute of limitations set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 76-1013 (Reissue 2009).”
Mut. of Omaha Bank v. Murante, 829 N.W.2d 676 (Neb. 2013).
· cites it 17× “The guarantor claims his obligation on the guaranty is subject to § 76-1013 of the Act. We affirm. SCOPE OF REVIEW [1] Statutory interpretation is a question of law that an appellate court resolves independently of the trial court.”
Sports Courts of Omaha, Ltd. v. Meginnis, 497 N.W.2d 38 (Neb. 1993).
· cites it 14× “The district court for Lancaster County granted summary judgment to Meginnis on three bases, one of which is the 3-month statute of limitations contained in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 76-1013 (Reissue 1990) of the Nebraska Trust Deeds Act.”
Bank of Papillion v. Ky Thi Nguyen, 567 N.W.2d 166 (Neb. 1997).
· cites it 14× “Because we determine that the deficiency claim was barred by the statute of limitations set forth in § 76-1013, we reverse the judgment and remand the cause to the district court with directions to dismiss.”
Douglas Cnty. Bank & Trust Co. v. Stamper, 505 N.W.2d 693 (Neb. 1993).
· cites it 10× “Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 76-1013 (Reissue 1990), the court determined the amount of the deficiency by determining the fair market value of the property and then subtracting the value of unpaid real estate taxes which were a lien on the property.”
First Nat. Bank North Platte v. Cardenas, 299 Neb. 497 (Neb. 2018).
· cites it 6× “§ 76-1013." IV. STANDARD OF REVIEW An appellate court will set aside a jury verdict because of insufficient evidence only if the verdict is clearly wrong.”
Boxum v. Munce, 751 N.W.2d 657 (Neb. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 12× “The district court found that the 3-month statute of limitations in which to collect a deficiency after foreclosure of a trust deed, found in Neb.Rev.Stat. § 76-1013 (Reissue 2003), barred Boxum's lawsuit.”
Am. Exch. Bank v. Topp, 321 Neb. 409 (Neb. 2026).
· cites it 41× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 76-1013 (Reissue 2018) plainly applies to “obligations for which the trust deed was given as security.”
Pantano v. Maryland Plaza P'ship, 507 N.W.2d 484 (Neb. 1993).
· cites it 15× “Among other things, the Pantanos and Fireman’s Fund stipulated: Without conceding one way or the other whether the mortgage indebtedness due from [Maryland Plaza] to [the Pantanos] has been paid in full [the Pantanos] may not recover a deficiency judgment against [Maryland…”
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.