Nebraska requests for admission: you can demand an editable copy

Nebraska rewrote § 6-336 effective January 1, 2025. Most of the restyling tracks the federal pattern, but one sentence in the new version exists nowhere else, and it solves a problem every litigator has had.

Ask for the file, and you get it

Section 6-336(a)(3), in the current version:

Requests may be served on the plaintiff after commencement of the action and on any other party with or after service of the summons on that party. Upon demand, the party served with the requests must be given an electronic copy of the requests in a readily editable format.

Upon demand — no motion, no good cause, no showing of burden. A demand is enough, and the obligation is stated as a "must."

The reason it matters is in the next provision. Section 6-336(a)(7) requires:

The answering or objecting party must reproduce each request and then state the party's answer or objection to the request.

Reproducing thirty requests by retyping them is wasted work, and retyping introduces errors into a document whose whole purpose is precision about what was asked. The editable-copy demand removes that. A responding party's first step should be to ask for the file.

For the requesting party, the practical answer is to serve an editable copy in the first place rather than wait for the demand.

Three ways to count the deadline

Section 6-336(a)(4) sets out the response period in three lettered alternatives:

A matter is admitted unless the party to whom the request is directed serves on the requesting party a written answer or objection addressed to the matter and signed by the party or its attorney: (A) within 30 days after being served with the request; (B) if the party is a defending party within 45 days after being served with the summons or 30 days after being served with the request, whichever is longer; or (C) the time stipulated to under Rule 29 or ordered by the court.

Subsection (B) is the one to check first if you act for a defendant. It gives 45 days after service of the summons or 30 days after service of the request, whichever is longer — so a defendant served with requests early in the case has the longer of the two, and a defendant served with requests months later simply has the thirty days.

The consequence of missing whichever period applies is automatic. The matter "is admitted" — no motion and no order.

Subsection (C) preserves the ordinary routes to a different period: a Rule 29 stipulation, or a court order.

Both versions are on the page, and that is useful

Section 6-336 as carried here sets out the current version, effective January 1, 2025, followed by the prior version in effect before that date. That is worth knowing when reading older briefs or opinions, because the prior text stated several of these rules differently.

The prior version put the reproduction duty on the request rather than in its own subsection: each matter "shall be separately set forth by the party making the request, and shall be repeated by the responding party in the answer or objection thereto." The obligation was the same; it was simply harder to find.

It also stated the defendant's period as a floor rather than as an alternative — a defendant "shall not be required to serve answers or objections before the expiration of forty-five days after service of the summons" — which reaches the same result by a different route. And it contained no editable-copy provision at all.

Where a case straddles the change, the date the requests were served is the date to check.

What can be asked

The current scope provision is stated in two branches:

A party may serve on any other party a written request to admit, for purposes of the pending action only, the truth of any matters within the scope of Rule 26(b) relating to: (A) facts, the application of law to fact, or opinions about either; and (B) the genuineness of any described documents.

"Opinions about either" is broader than it looks — an opinion about a fact, or an opinion about the application of law to fact, is a permitted subject.

On documents, section 6-336(a)(2) attaches a condition: a request to admit genuineness "must be accompanied by a copy of the document unless it is, or has been, otherwise furnished or made available for inspection and copying." Each matter must be separately stated.

Answering, and the objection that is not available

Section 6-336(a)(5) sets the standard for an answer:

If a matter is not admitted, the answer must specifically deny it or state in detail why the answering party cannot truthfully admit or deny it. A denial must fairly respond to the substance of the matter; and when good faith requires that a party qualify an answer or deny only a part of the matter, the answer must specify the part admitted and qualify or deny the rest.

Lack of knowledge is a permitted answer only on conditions: the party may assert it "only if the party states that it has made reasonable inquiry and that the information it knows or can readily obtain is insufficient to enable it to admit or deny."

Two obligations follow in section 6-336(a)(6):

The grounds for objecting to a request must be stated. A party must not object solely on the ground that the request presents a genuine issue for trial.

The second is the one that catches parties who treat requests for admission as improper because they go to the heart of the case. They may go to the heart of the case. The answer is to deny, not to object.

If an answer does not comply, the matter can be deemed admitted

Section 6-336(a)(8) gives the requesting party a route to test what came back:

The requesting party may move to determine the sufficiency of an answer or objection. Unless the court finds an objection justified, it must order that an answer be served. On finding that an answer does not comply with this rule, the court may order either that the matter is admitted or that an amended answer be served. The court may defer its final decision until a pretrial conference or a specified time before trial. Rule 37(a)(5) applies to an award of expenses.

Two different outcomes for two different problems. An unjustified objection produces one result only — the court "must order that an answer be served." A non-compliant answer gives the court a choice, and one of the options is to deem the matter admitted.

That is why an evasive denial is riskier than a clear one. A denial that does not fairly respond to the substance of the matter is not merely inadequate; it can become the admission it was trying to avoid. And Rule 37(a)(5) brings the ordinary fee-shifting consequences of a discovery motion with it.

What an admission does, and how narrowly it can be undone

Section 6-336(b):

A matter admitted under this rule is conclusively established unless the court, on motion, permits the admission to be withdrawn or amended. The court may permit withdrawal or amendment if it promotes the presentation of the merits of the action and if the court is not persuaded that it would prejudice the requesting party in maintaining or defending the action on the merits. An admission under this rule is not an admission for any other purpose and cannot be used against the party in any other proceeding.

Two conditions, both required, and they point in different directions — the merits must be promoted and the court must not be persuaded of prejudice. A party that stopped preparing to prove a fact because it had been admitted is describing exactly the prejudice the second condition contemplates.

The last sentence is the limit that makes admissions safe to give: they belong to this case and travel nowhere else.

A short checklist

If you are serving requests:

1. Serve an editable electronic copy up front; you will be asked for one anyway.
2. State each matter separately, and attach document copies where genuineness is in issue.
3. Move on a non-compliant answer, not just on an unjustified objection — the remedies differ.
4. Check which version applied when the requests were served if the case straddles January 1, 2025.
5. Remember Rule 37(a)(5) applies to expenses on the motion.
6. Consider serving with the summons; the rule allows it.

If you are responding:

1. Demand the editable copy. The rule entitles you to it.
2. Reproduce each request before your answer or objection.
3. Use the longer period if you are a defending party — 45 days from the summons, or 30 from the request.
4. Do not object on "genuine issue for trial" alone, and do not answer evasively; either can end in a deemed admission.

Where these rules live

• Neb. Ct. R. Disc. § 6-336 — Requests for admission
• Responding to a Nebraska complaint
• Nebraska motion to compel discovery
• Nebraska motion to dismiss
• Nebraska summary judgment

This page explains what the rules say. It isn't legal advice, and how the 2025 amendments apply to requests served around the changeover is a question this page does not answer.