§ 25-2127.Ejectment; plaintiff's right terminating while action pending; verdict; judgment.
Article 21: Special Proceedings and Actions · Not amended since original codification · Last verified July 22, 2026
Full Text of § 25-2127
Source
R.S.1867, Code § 629, p. 505; R.S.1913, § 8242; C.S.1922, § 9195; C.S.1929, § 20-2127; R.S.1943, § 25-2127.
Plain-English Summary
Litigation takes time, and a plaintiff’s interest in property is not always permanent. Section 25-2127 addresses what happens when a plaintiff’s right to recover the property — perhaps tied to a lease or a limited estate — expires while the ejectment case is still pending.
Rather than forcing an all-or-nothing outcome, the verdict and judgment must track the facts as they stand at the end of the case. The plaintiff, having shown a right to recover when the action started, can still recover for the time the defendant wrongfully withheld the property, even though that same plaintiff no longer holds a right to future possession by the time judgment is entered.
This keeps a defendant from benefiting by delaying the case long enough for the plaintiff’s underlying interest to run out on its own.
Frequently Asked Questions
What happens if my right to the property ends before the case is decided?
The verdict and judgment must be entered according to the facts as they stand, and you may still recover for the period the property was wrongfully withheld.
Can I still recover something if my interest expired during the lawsuit?
Yes. Section 25-2127 allows recovery for withholding the property even after the plaintiff’s right to recover has since terminated.
Does the judgment reflect my original claim or the facts as they now stand?
The facts as they now stand — the verdict and judgment must be according to the fact of what happened.
What can a plaintiff recover once the right to possess has lapsed?
Recovery for the defendant’s wrongful withholding of the property during the time the plaintiff’s right existed.
Does this section protect plaintiffs whose property interests are naturally limited in time?
Yes. It addresses exactly that situation, where a right shown at the start of the case terminates before the case ends.