reglab/housing_qa huggingface dataset:
NE Code § 27-413 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-413 - Offense of sexual assault, defined.

27-413.  Offense of sexual assault, defined.For purposes of sections 27-414 and 27-415, offense of sexual assault means sexual assault under section 28-319 or 28-320, sexual abuse by a school employee under section 28-316.01, sexual assault of a child under section 28-319.01 or 28-320.01, sexual assault by use of an electronic communication device under section 28-320.02, sexual abuse of an inmate or parolee under sections 28-322.01 to 28-322.03, sexual abuse of a protected individual under section 28-322.04, sexual abuse of a detainee under section 28-322.05, an attempt or conspiracy to commit any of the crimes listed in this section, or the commission of or conviction for a crime in another jurisdiction that is substantially similar to any crime listed in this section.Source  Laws 2009, LB97, § 4;  Laws 2015, LB294, § 8;  Laws 2019, LB519, § 3;  Laws 2020, LB881, § 3.
NE Code § 27-415 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-415 - Civil case; evidence of crimes in sexual assault cases.

27-415.  Civil case; evidence of crimes in sexual assault cases.(1) In a civil case in which a claim for damages or other relief is predicated on a party's alleged commission of conduct constituting an offense of sexual assault, evidence of that party's commission of another offense or offenses of sexual assault is admissible if there is clear and convincing evidence otherwise admissible under the Nebraska Evidence Rules that the party committed the other offense or offenses. If admissible, such evidence may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant.(2) A party who intends to offer evidence under this section shall disclose the evidence to the party against whom it will be offered, including statements of witnesses or a summary of the substance of any testimony that is expected to be offered, at least fifteen days before the scheduled date of trial or at such later time as the court may allow for good cause.(3) Before admitting evidence of a party's commission of another offense or offenses of sexual assault under this section, the court shall conduct a hearing outside the presence of any jury. At the hearing, the rules of evidence shall apply and the court shall apply a section 27-403 balancing and admit the evidence unless the risk of prejudice substantially outweighs the probative value of the evidence. In assessing the balancing, the court may consider any relevant factor such as (a) the probability that the other offense occurred, (b) the proximity in time and intervening circumstances of the other offenses, and (c) the similarity of the other acts to the crime charged.(4) This section shall not be construed to limit the admission or consideration of evidence under any other section of the Nebraska Evidence Rules.Source Laws 2009, LB97, § 6.
NE Code § 27-501 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-501 - Rule 501. Privileges recognized only as provided.

27-501.  Rule 501. Privileges recognized only as provided.Except as otherwise required by the Constitution of the United States or the State of Nebraska or provided by Act of Congress, or the Legislature of the State of Nebraska, by these rules or by other rules adopted by the Supreme Court of Nebraska which are not in conflict with laws governing such matters, no person has the privilege to:(1) Refuse to be a witness; or(2) Refuse to disclose any matter; or(3) Refuse to produce any object or writing; or(4) Prevent another from being a witness or disclosing any matter or producing any object or writing.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 22. Annotations An expert witness retained by one party may be compelled or will be allowed to testify to a matter of opinion upon request of the opposing party. IAFF Local 831 v. City of No. Platte, 215 Neb. 89, 337 N.W.2d 716 (1983).
NE Code § 27-502 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-502 - Omitted.

27-502.  Omitted.Source  Note: Reference to Federal Rule 502 "Required reports privileged by statute" has been omitted. Nebraska Evidence Rules have no corresponding section and for that reason the Nebraska citation of section 27-502 has also been omitted.
NE Code § 27-506 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-506 - Rule 506. Communications to clergyman; definitions; general rule of privilege; who may claim privilege.

27-506.  Rule 506. Communications to clergyman; definitions; general rule of privilege; who may claim privilege.(1) As used in this rule:(a) A clergyman is a minister, priest, rabbi, or other similar functionary of a religious organization, or an individual reasonably believed so to be by the person consulting him; and(b) A communication is confidential if made privately and not intended for further disclosure except to other persons present in furtherance of the purpose of the communication.(2) A person has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent another from disclosing a confidential communication by the person to a clergyman in his professional character as spiritual advisor.(3) The privilege may be claimed by the person, by his guardian or conservator, or by his personal representative if he is deceased. The clergyman may claim the privilege on behalf of the person. His authority so to do is presumed in the absence of evidence to the contrary.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 26.
NE Code § 27-507 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-507 - Rule 507. Political vote; privilege.

27-507.  Rule 507. Political vote; privilege.Every person has a privilege to refuse to disclose the tenor of his vote at a political election conducted by secret ballot unless the vote was cast illegally.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 27.
NE Code § 27-508 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-508 - Rule 508. Trade secrets; privilege; protective measures.

27-508.  Rule 508. Trade secrets; privilege; protective measures.A person has a privilege, which may be claimed by him or his agent or employee, to refuse to disclose and to prevent other persons from disclosing a trade secret owned by him, if the allowance of the privilege will not tend to conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice. When disclosure is directed, the judge shall take such protective measures as the interests of the holder of the privilege and of the parties and the furtherance of justice may require.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 28. Annotations  Procedure established for use by the Nebraska Public Service Commission when deciding whether to publicly disclose information which it has found to be relevant and necessary for its proceedings and which a party contends to be in the nature of a trade secret or confidential research, development, or commercial information. In re Application of Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 223 Neb. 415, 390 N.W.2d 495 (1986). Some factors to be considered in determining whether given information is one's trade secret are (1) the extent to which the information is known outside of his business, (2) the extent to which it is known by employees and others involved in his business, (3) the extent of measures taken by him to guard the secrecy of the information, (4) the value of the information to him and his competitors, (5) the amount of effort or money expended by him in developing the information, and (6) the ease or difficulty with which the information could be properly acquired or duplicated by others. In re Application of Northwestern Bell Tel. Co., 223 Neb. 415, 390 N.W.2d 495 (1986).
NE Code § 27-509 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-509 - Rule 509. Secrets of state and other official information; general rule of privilege; who may claim privilege; procedure; effect of sustaining claim.

27-509.  Rule 509. Secrets of state and other official information; general rule of privilege; who may claim privilege; procedure; effect of sustaining claim.(1) The government has a privilege to refuse to give evidence and to prevent any public officer from giving evidence as to communications made by or to such public officer in official confidence when the public interest would suffer by the disclosure.(2) The privilege may be claimed by the public officer sought to be examined, or by the chief officer of the department of government administering the subject matter which the evidence concerned. The required showing may be made in whole or in part in the form of a written statement. The judge may hear the matter in chambers, but all counsel are entitled to inspect the claim and showing and be heard thereon. The judge may take any protective measure which the interest of the government and the furtherance of justice may require.(3) If the circumstances of the case indicate a substantial possibility that a claim of privilege would be appropriate but has not been made because of oversight or lack of knowledge, the judge shall give or cause notice to be given to the officer entitled to claim the privilege and shall stay further proceedings a reasonable time to afford opportunity to assert a claim of privilege.(4) If a claim of privilege is sustained in a proceeding to which the government is a party and it appears that another party is thereby deprived of material evidence, the judge shall make any further orders which the interests of justice require, including striking the testimony of a witness, declaring a mistrial, finding against the government upon an issue as to which the evidence is relevant, or dismissing the action.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 29.
NE Code § 27-511 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-511 - Rule 511. Waiver of privilege by voluntary disclosure.

27-511.  Rule 511. Waiver of privilege by voluntary disclosure.A person upon whom these rules confer a privilege against disclosure of a confidential matter or communication waives the privilege if he or his predecessor, while holder of the privilege, voluntarily discloses or consents to disclosure of any significant part of the matter or communication. This rule does not apply if the disclosure is itself a privileged communication.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 31.
NE Code § 27-512 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-512 - Rule 512. Privileged matter disclosed under compulsion or without opportunity to claim privilege.

27-512.  Rule 512. Privileged matter disclosed under compulsion or without opportunity to claim privilege.Evidence of a statement or other disclosure of privileged matter is not admissible against the holder of the privilege if the disclosure was (1) compelled erroneously or (2) made without opportunity to claim the privilege.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 32.
NE Code § 27-513 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-513 - Rule 513. Comment on or inference from claim of privilege improper; jury instruction.

27-513.  Rule 513. Comment on or inference from claim of privilege improper; jury instruction.(1) The claim of a privilege, whether in the present proceeding or upon a prior occasion, is not a proper subject of comment by judge or counsel. No inference may be drawn therefrom.(2) In jury cases, proceedings shall be conducted, to the extent practicable, so as to facilitate the making of claims of privilege without the knowledge of the jury.(3) Upon request, any party against whom the jury might draw an adverse inference from a claim of privilege is entitled to an instruction that no inference may be drawn therefrom.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 33.Annotations  Although a witness invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege in the jury's presence, no error was plainly evident from the record where the bill of exceptions did not contain evidence showing that the parties or the court knew the witness would invoke his privilege and where, after being given immunity, the witness testified and was subject to cross-examination. State v. Munoz, 303 Neb. 69, 927 N.W.2d 25 (2019). A hearing to determine whether a privilege is claimed is not absolutely required to comply with the requirements of this section, but if held, it is straightforward in that it must provide the witness the opportunity to testify or invoke a privilege. The State may then offer immunity in exchange for the witness’s testimony. Finally, the trial court must decide whether the witness intends to testify and if it would be prejudicial to either the defendant or the State to call or not to call the witness. State v. Draper, 289 Neb. 777, 857 N.W.2d 334 (2015). Pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, although the trial judge's comments were certainly unnecessary and ill advised, they did not permit the jury to draw an unfavorable inference from the defendant's failure to testify and adduce evidence. State v. Nissen, 252 Neb. 51, 560 N.W.2d 157 (1997). A prosecutor's reference to the defendant's failure to make an exculpatory statement before the defendant is in custody does not violate the defendant's right to remain silent. State v. Gregory, 220 Neb. 778, 371 N.W.2d 754 (1985).
NE Code § 27-601 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-601 - Rule 601. General rule of competency.

27-601.  Rule 601. General rule of competency.Every person is competent to be a witness except as otherwise provided in these rules.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 34. Annotations  The question of the competency of a child witness rests largely within the discretion of the trial court, and that determination will not be disturbed in the absence of an abuse of discretion. State v. Guy, 227 Neb. 610, 419 N.W.2d 152 (1988). No abuse of discretion to allow 5-year-old's testimony when conflicting testimony was caused by nature of defense counsel's questions, which created question of credibility and not competency. State v. Miner, 216 Neb. 309, 343 N.W.2d 899 (1984). Except as specifically provided otherwise by the rules of evidence, every person is competent to be a witness about those things of which he has personal knowledge. Tuch v. Tuch, 210 Neb. 601, 316 N.W.2d 304 (1982). Where injured victim of defendant's assault with a gun was defendant's wife, she was competent to testify where the jury had prior knowledge of her condition. State v. Martin, 198 Neb. 811, 255 N.W.2d 844 (1977).
NE Code § 27-602 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-602 - Rule 602. Lack of personal knowledge; witness may not testify; evidence.

27-602.  Rule 602. Lack of personal knowledge; witness may not testify; evidence.A witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that he has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may, but need not, consist of the testimony of the witness himself. This rule is subject to the provisions of section 27-703, relating to opinion testimony by expert witnesses.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 35.Annotations  Under this section and sections 27-701 and 27-702, it is improper for a witness to testify whether another person may or may not have been telling the truth in a specific instance. State v. Rocha, 295 Neb. 716, 890 N.W.2d 178 (2017). Under this section, lay witnesses may testify only as to factual matters based upon their personal knowledge. State v. Rocha, 295 Neb. 716, 890 N.W.2d 178 (2017). A party's "assumption" of a fact confesses the absence of personal knowledge of the fact. Sulu v. Magana, 293 Neb. 148, 879 N.W.2d 674 (2016). Inadequate foundation for personal knowledge was cured on cross-examination when opposing counsel questioned witness regarding matter for own purposes beyond explaining or rebutting the original evidence. State v. Rieger, 260 Neb. 519, 618 N.W.2d 619 (2000). It was not necessary for a police officer to remember the name of a person to whom he administered a photographic array in order to have personal knowledge of that person's photographic identification. State v. Rieger, 260 Neb. 519, 618 N.W.2d 619 (2000). In establishing foundation for test results, a witness may not testify as to whether laboratory protocols were followed unless the witness has personal knowledge of the matter, i.e., the witness performed the test or witnessed the test being performed. State v. Jackson, 255 Neb. 68, 582 N.W.2d 317 (1998). A witness testifying to objective facts must have had means of knowing the facts from the witness' personal knowledge. State v. Kirksey, 254 Neb. 162, 575 N.W.2d 377 (1998). A witness may not testify about the custody procedures used by a police department unless evidence is introduced to show that he or she has personal knowledge of the matter. State v. Smith, 238 Neb. 111, 469 N.W.2d 146 (1991). A witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that he has personal knowledge of the matter. The record supported a conclusion that the deponent did not possess or could not articulate personal knowledge. State v. Irish, 223 Neb. 578, 391 N.W.2d 137 (1986). Testimony concerning observations of conduct, behavior in terms of false perceptions, or mistaken ideas, is controlled by the personal knowledge provision of this section. State v. Norfolk, 221 Neb. 810, 381 N.W.2d 120 (1986).
NE Code § 27-603 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-603 - Rule 603. Oath or affirmation.

27-603.  Rule 603. Oath or affirmation.Before testifying, every witness shall be required to declare that he will testify truthfully, by oath or affirmation administered in a form calculated to awaken his conscience and impress his mind with his duty to do so.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 36.
NE Code § 27-604 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-604 - Rule 604. Interpreters.

27-604.  Rule 604. Interpreters.An interpreter is subject to the provisions of these rules relating to qualification as an expert and the administration of an oath or affirmation that he will make a true translation.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 37.
NE Code § 27-607 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-607 - Rule 607. Who may impeach.

27-607.  Rule 607. Who may impeach.The credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party calling him.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 40. Annotations  Under this section, the credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party calling the witness. A party may not, however, use the rule as an artifice for putting before the jury substantive evidence that is otherwise inadmissible. But evidence of a witness' bias, however, is substantive evidence that a party can present on direct or cross-examination. State v. Iromuanya, 282 Neb. 798, 806 N.W.2d 404 (2011). Although under this section "(t)he credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party calling him (or her)," a party may not use a prior inconsistent statement of a witness under the guise of impeachment for the primary purpose of placing before the jury substantive evidence which is not otherwise admissible. State v. Boppre, 243 Neb. 908, 503 N.W.2d 526 (1993). A party does not vouch for the credibility of its witness. State v. Joy, 220 Neb. 535, 371 N.W.2d 113 (1985). The credibility of a witness may be attacked by any party, including the party who called the witness. State v. Marco, 220 Neb. 96, 368 N.W.2d 470 (1985). The rule allowing a party to impeach his own witness may not be used as an artifice by which inadmissible matter may be gotten to the jury through the device of offering a witness whose testimony is or should be known to be adverse in order, under the name of impeachment, to get before the jury for its consideration a favorable ex parte statement the witness had made. State v. Brehmer, 211 Neb. 29, 317 N.W.2d 885 (1982). Where the need for impeachment is small or nonexistent and the danger that the prior inconsistent statement will be considered substantively is great, the statement should be excluded. State v. Price, 202 Neb. 308, 275 N.W.2d 82 (1979).
NE Code § 27-610 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-610 - Rule 610. Religious beliefs or opinions.

27-610.  Rule 610. Religious beliefs or opinions.Evidence of the beliefs or opinions of a witness on matters of religion is not admissible for the purpose of showing that by reason of their nature his credibility is impaired or enhanced.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 43.
NE Code § 27-612 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-612 - Rule 612. Writing used to refresh memory; rights of adverse party; matters unrelated; preservation for appeal; orders.

27-612.  Rule 612. Writing used to refresh memory; rights of adverse party; matters unrelated; preservation for appeal; orders.If a witness uses a writing to refresh his memory for the purpose of testifying, either before or while testifying, an adverse party is entitled to have it produced at the hearing, to inspect it, to cross-examine the witness thereon, and to introduce in evidence those portions which relate to the testimony of the witness. If it is claimed that the writing contains matters not related to the subject matter of the testimony, the judge shall examine the writing in camera, excise any portions not so related, and order delivery of the remainder to the party entitled thereto. Any portion withheld over objections shall be preserved and made available to the appellate court in the event of an appeal. If a writing is not produced or delivered pursuant to order under this rule, the judge shall make any order justice requires.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 45.Annotations  A party seeking access to a document used to refresh a witness' recollection bears the burden of establishing that the document sought was actually used by the witness to refresh recollection. State v. Schroder, 232 Neb. 65, 439 N.W.2d 489 (1989). A precondition to the production and use by an adverse party of a witness' prior written statement is that the statement has been used by the witness to refresh his recollection. Rawlings v. Andersen, 195 Neb. 686, 240 N.W.2d 568 (1976). This section requires production of not only documents used to refresh recollection in the courtroom while the witness is testifying, but also those writings the witness reviewed prior to giving testimony. State v. McMillion, 23 Neb. App. 687, 875 N.W.2d 877 (2016). The purpose of the phrase "for the purpose of testifying" is to safeguard against wholesale exploration of an opposing party's files and to ensure that access is limited only to those writings which may fairly be said in fact to have an impact upon the testimony of the witness. State v. Jones, 6 Neb. App. 647, 577 N.W.2d 302 (1998).