Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 84
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 84-712.08 (2026)

Records; federal government; exception

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

If it is determined by any federal department or agency or other federal source of funds, services, or essential information, that any provision of sections 84-712, 84-712.01, 84-712.03 to 84-712.09, and 84-1413 would cause the denial of any funds, services, or essential information from the United States Government which would otherwise definitely be available to an agency of this state, such provision shall be suspended as to such agency, but only to the extent necessary to prevent denial of such funds, services, or essential information.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2022 · leading case: State ex rel. Unger v. State, 878 N.W.2d 540 (Neb. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State ex rel. Unger v. State, 878 N.W.2d 540 (Neb. 2016). · cites it 4× “If the requesting party satisfies its prima facie claim for release of public records, the public body opposing disclosure must show by clear and convincing evidence that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 84-712.05 (Reissue 2014) or Neb.”
Steckelberg v. Nebraska State Patrol, 885 N.W.2d 44 (Neb. 2016). · cites it 4× “If the requesting party satisfies its prima facie claim for release of public records, the public body opposing disclosure must show by clear and convincing evidence that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 84-712.05 (Reissue 2014) or Neb.”
State ex rel. BH Media Grp. v. Frakes, 305 Neb. 780 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 5× “If the requesting party satisfies its prima facie claim for release of public records, the public body opposing disclosure must show by clear and conclusive evidence that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 84-712.05 (Reissue 2014) or Neb.”
State ex rel. Veskrna v. Steel, 296 Neb. 581 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 3× “2016), and an exemption for certain records of the federal government is described in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 84-712.08 (Reissue 2014).”
Jacob v. Nebraska Bd. of Parole, 982 N.W.2d 815 (Neb. 2022). · cites it 3× “If the petitioner succeeds in proving a prima facie case for the writ, the burden then shifts to the public body opposing disclo- sure to show by clear and conclusive evidence that either Neb. Rev. Stat. § 84-712.05 (Cum. Supp. 2022) or Neb.”
Evertson v. City of Kimball, 767 N.W.2d 751 (Neb. 2009). “05 or § 84-712.08 exempts the records from disclosure.”
State Ex Rel. Nebraska Health Care Ass'n v. Dep't of Health & Human Servs. Fin. & Support, 587 N.W.2d 100 (Neb. 1998). “Thereafter, if the public body holding the record wishes to oppose the issuance of a writ of mandamus, the public body must show, by clear and conclusive evidence, that the public record at issue is exempt from the disclosure requirement under one of the exceptions provided by §…”
Huff v. Brown, 305 Neb. 648 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 2× “§ 84-712.08 (Reissue 2014). 6. Mandamus: Words and Phrases.”
Aksamit Resource Mgmt. v. Nebraska Pub. Power Dist., 299 Neb. 114 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 2× “Statutory language is to be given its plain and ordinary meaning, and an appellate court will not resort to inter- pretation to ascertain the meaning of statutory words which are plain, direct, and unambiguous.”
Boppre v. Overman (Neb. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “” See, also, § 84-712.08 (federal government exception).”
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.