Where an objection has once been made to the admission of testimony and overruled by the court it shall be unnecessary to repeat the same objection to further testimony of the same nature by the same witness in order to save the error, if any, in the ruling of the court whereby such testimony was received.
§ 25-1141.Testimony; repetition of objections unnecessary.
Article 11: Trial · Last amended 1915 · Last verified July 22, 2026
In one sentenceThis section spares a party from repeating the same objection to further testimony from the same witness on the same subject, once the court has already overruled that objection.
Full Text of § 25-1141
Source
Laws 1915, c. 245, § 1, p. 566; C.S.1922, § 8824; C.S.1929, § 20-1141; R.S.1943, § 25-1141.
Plain-English Summary
Trials move fast, and a witness often keeps testifying about the same subject long after a lawyer’s first objection to it. Section 25-1141 recognizes that repeating the identical objection over and over would slow the proceeding without adding anything useful. Once an objection to the admission of testimony has been made and overruled, the objecting party does not have to repeat that same objection to further testimony of the same nature from the same witness to preserve the error, if any, in the court’s ruling.
The rule is narrow by design. It covers testimony of the same nature from the same witness — not a blanket excuse from objecting to different topics, different exhibits, or different witnesses. A lawyer still needs to raise a fresh objection whenever the subject or source of the testimony changes.
Frequently Asked Questions
If a judge overrules my objection once, do I have to keep objecting to the same type of testimony?
No. Once the objection has been made and overruled, you do not need to repeat it for further testimony of the same nature by the same witness to preserve the error.
Does this rule cover objections to a different witness testifying about the same topic?
No. The section covers repeated testimony from the same witness; a new witness addressing the same subject calls for its own objection.
What if the same witness moves on to a different topic?
The rule protects only testimony “of the same nature.” A shift to a new subject is not covered, so a fresh objection is still needed to preserve the issue.
Why does this rule exist?
It avoids the pointless repetition of restating an objection the court has already ruled on, while still preserving the objecting party’s right to challenge that ruling later.
How does this section relate to § 25-1139?
Section 25-1139 removes the need to formally note an exception to a ruling; § 25-1141 removes the need to repeat the underlying objection itself once made and overruled for the same testimony.
Source & verification. Section text and the amendment-history citation are
reproduced verbatim from the Nebraska Legislature, Revisor of Statutes, enacted by the
Nebraska Legislature. Last verified July 22, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: do i have to keep objecting same testimonyrepeated objection unnecessary nebraskapreserving objection to witness testimonyoverruled objection same witness