§ 25-1912.01.Appellate review; motion for new trial; when required.
Article 19: Appeals and Proceedings in Error · Last amended 1982 · Last verified July 22, 2026
In one sentenceThis section states that a motion for new trial is not a prerequisite to appellate review generally, or to challenging the sufficiency of the evidence after a jury trial, but remains required to preserve a claim that the damages awarded were inadequate or excessive.
Full Text of § 25-1912.01
Text size
(1) A motion for a new trial shall not be a prerequisite to obtaining appellate review of any issue upon which the ruling of the trial court appears in the record.
(2) When an action has been tried before a jury a motion for a new trial shall not be a prerequisite to obtaining appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence, but a motion for a new trial shall be a prerequisite to obtaining appellate review of the issue of inadequate or excessive damages.
Source
Laws 1982, LB 720, § 1.
Plain-English Summary
Section 25-1912.01 removes an old procedural trap. As a general matter, a party does not have to file a motion for a new trial before obtaining appellate review of any issue on which the trial court’s ruling appears in the record. The appeal itself, filed under section 25-1912, is enough to preserve that issue.
Jury trials get one specific exception. A motion for new trial is still not required to obtain appellate review of whether the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. But if the complaint on appeal is that the damages awarded were inadequate or excessive, a motion for new trial raising that issue is a prerequisite to appellate review — skipping it forfeits the claim.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do I need to file a motion for new trial before appealing?
Generally no. Section 25-1912.01 states that a motion for new trial is not a prerequisite to appellate review of an issue on which the trial court’s ruling appears in the record.
What about challenging whether the evidence supports the jury’s verdict?
A motion for new trial is not required to obtain appellate review of the sufficiency of the evidence after a jury trial.
What if I think the damages award was too low or too high?
That is the exception. A motion for new trial is a prerequisite to appellate review of a claim that the damages were inadequate or excessive.
Does this exception apply to bench trials as well as jury trials?
The exception is stated specifically for actions tried before a jury.
Why does the sufficiency-of-evidence issue get different treatment than the damages issue?
Section 25-1912.01 treats them as distinct categories: sufficiency of the evidence does not require a new trial motion first, while an inadequate or excessive damages claim does.
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:motion for new trial prerequisite nebraska appealsufficiency of evidence appeal without new trial motionexcessive damages appeal nebraskainadequate damages preserve for appeal