When the judgment was rendered before the action stood for trial, the suspension may be granted as provided in section 25-2006, although no valid defense to the action is shown; and the court shall make such orders concerning the executions to be issued on the judgment, as shall give to the defendant the same rights of delay he would have had if the judgment had been rendered at the proper time.
§ 25-2007.District court judgment; rendition before action regularly stood for trial; rights of defendant; no showing of valid defense required.
Article 20: Vacation or Modification of Judgments and Orders · Not amended since original codification · Last verified July 22, 2026
In one sentenceThis section lets a party get the same suspension of proceedings described in section 25-2006 for a judgment rendered before the action stood for trial without showing any valid defense, and requires the court to give the defendant the same delay rights the defendant would have had if judgment had come at the proper time.
Full Text of § 25-2007
Source
R.S.1867, Code § 608, p. 502; R.S.1913, § 8213; C.S.1922, § 9166; C.S.1929, § 20-2007; R.S.1943, § 25-2007.
Plain-English Summary
Section 25-2007 carves out a special case for judgments rendered before the action stood for trial, the same premature-judgment problem that section 25-1932 labels a clerical error. A party in that situation does not have to clear the hurdle section 25-2005 otherwise sets. The suspension of proceedings described in section 25-2006 may be granted even though no valid defense to the action is shown.
The court also has to protect the defendant’s timing. It must make orders concerning the executions issued on the judgment that give the defendant the same rights of delay the defendant would have had if the judgment had been rendered at the proper time, rather than letting the premature judgment strip away time the defendant was otherwise entitled to.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do I need to show a valid defense to suspend a prematurely rendered judgment?
No. Section 25-2007 lets the suspension under section 25-2006 be granted for a judgment rendered before the action stood for trial without showing a valid defense.
How does this differ from the ordinary vacation process?
Section 25-2005 ordinarily requires a valid defense or cause of action before a judgment can be vacated; this section removes that requirement for a judgment rendered before the action stood for trial.
What protection does the defendant get regarding executions on the judgment?
The court must order the executions on the judgment in a way that gives the defendant the same rights of delay the defendant would have had if the judgment had been rendered at the proper time.
How does this section relate to section 25-1932?
Section 25-1932 labels rendering judgment before an action stood for trial a clerical error; section 25-2007 addresses the practical remedy of suspending enforcement in that situation.
Does this section eliminate the injunction procedure in section 25-2006?
No. It uses that same suspension procedure, only without requiring a showing of a valid defense.
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: premature judgment suspension nebraskano valid defense required suspend judgmentdefendant rights of delay nebraska judgmentjudgment before trial ready suspend proceedings