Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 76
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 76-1439 (2026)

Retaliatory conduct prohibited

✓ text as last checked Oct. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) Except as provided in this section, a landlord may not retaliate by increasing rent or decreasing services or by bringing or threatening to bring an action for possession after:

(a) The tenant has complained to a government agency charged with responsibility for enforcement of a minimum building or housing code of a violation applicable to the premises materially affecting health and safety; or

(b) The tenant has organized or become a member of a tenants' union or similar organization.

(2) If the landlord acts in violation of subsection (1), the tenant is entitled to the remedies provided in section 76-1430 and has a defense in action against him for possession. Nothing in this section shall be construed as prohibiting reasonable rent increases or changes in services notwithstanding the occurrence of acts specified in subsection (1).

(3) Notwithstanding subsections (1) and (2), a landlord may bring an action for possession if:

(a) The violation of the applicable minimum building or housing code was caused primarily by lack of reasonable care by the tenant or other person in his household or upon the premises with his consent;

(b) The tenant is in default in rent; or

(c) Compliance with the applicable minimum building or housing code requires alteration, remodeling, or demolition which would effectively deprive the tenant of use of the dwelling unit.

The maintenance of the action does not release the landlord from liability under subsection (2) of section 76-1425.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1988–2023 · leading case: Vasquez v. Chi Props., LLC, 925 N.W.2d 304 (Neb. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Vasquez v. Chi Props., LLC, 925 N.W.2d 304 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 10× “CHI asserted that tenants failed to state claims under § 76-1430 or § 76-1439 for retaliation or ouster, because there was no allegation that tenants had either recovered possession or lawfully terminated the rental agreement.”
Vasquez v. CHI Props., 302 Neb. 742 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 10× “Order of Dismissal The district court concluded that tenants failed to state a claim for breach of the duty to deliver, because §§ 76-1418 and 76-1426 did not apply when tenants accepted - 749 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports VASQUEZ v.”
Imperial Colliery Co. v. Fout, 373 S.E.2d 489 (W. Va. 1988). “Gen.Stat.Ann. § 47a-20; Del.Code Ann.tit. 25, § 5516; Md.”
Espenschied v. Mallick, 633 A.2d 388 (D.C. 1993). “§ 70-24-431; Neb. Rev.Stat. § 76-1439; Nev.Rev.Stat.Ann.”
Vasquez v. CHI Props., 302 Neb. 742 (Neb. 2019). · cites it 10× “Order of Dismissal The district court concluded that tenants failed to state a claim for breach of the duty to deliver, because §§ 76-1418 and 76-1426 did not apply when tenants accepted - 749 - Nebraska Supreme Court A dvance Sheets 302 Nebraska R eports VASQUEZ v.”
Grier v. Realty Works, No. 4:22-cv-03164 (D. Neb. May 4, 2023). · cites it 2× “Plaintiff alleges “someone notif[ied] her [that] the Building violates NEC Code 240.”
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.