reglab/housing_qa huggingface dataset:
NE Code § 27-614 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-614 - Rule 614. Calling and interrogation of witnesses by judge; objections.

27-614.  Rule 614. Calling and interrogation of witnesses by judge; objections.(1) The judge may, on his own motion or at the suggestion of a party, call witnesses, and all parties are entitled to cross-examine witnesses thus called.(2) The judge may interrogate witnesses, whether called by himself or by a party.(3) Objections to the calling of witnesses by the judge or to interrogation by him may be made at the time or at the next available opportunity when the jury is not present.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 47. Annotations  A party’s right to cross-examine witnesses under subsection (1) of this section was not violated where there was no request by either party to question either witness or present additional evidence and the court gave no indication that such a request would be denied. Torres v. Morales, 287 Neb. 587, 843 N.W.2d 805 (2014). Subsection (2) of this section provides that the trial judge may interrogate witnesses, whether called by the judge or by a party; however, the trial judge should use this right sparingly. State v. Bjorklund, 258 Neb. 432, 604 N.W.2d 169 (2000). Under the provisions of this section, the trial judge may interrogate witnesses, whether called by himself or by a party; objections to questions propounded by the court must be made at the time of trial. State v. Fix, 219 Neb. 674, 365 N.W.2d 471 (1985). The right of a judge to interrogate a witness should be very sparingly exercised because, generally, counsel for the parties should be relied on and allowed to manage and bring out their own case, and at no time should the actions of the judge in this respect be such as to warrant any assertion that they were with a view to assistance of the one or the other party to the cause. State v. Brehmer, 211 Neb. 29, 317 N.W.2d 885 (1982). Trial court did not err in failing to allow party to cross-examine witness following interrogation by judge where that party made no objection to record as made, and that party made no request to further interrogate witness. Baltes v. Hodges, 207 Neb. 740, 301 N.W.2d 92 (1981). A trial court may, on its own motion, call witnesses and interrogate witnesses pursuant to this section. Scudder v. Haug, 201 Neb. 107, 266 N.W.2d 232 (1978). Trial court erred in failing to allow party to cross-examine witness following interrogation by judge where counsel's request to examine or cross-examine any witnesses was denied. Hronek v. Brosnan, 20 Neb. App. 200, 823 N.W.2d 204 (2012). Pursuant to subsection (1) of this section, a trial court must act impartially and not prejudicially in exercising the discretionary power given to judges under this section to call and to interrogate witnesses. Gernstein v. Allen, 10 Neb. App. 214, 630 N.W.2d 672 (2001).
NE Code § 27-615 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-615 - Rule 615. Exclusion of witnesses; exceptions.

27-615.  Rule 615. Exclusion of witnesses; exceptions.At the request of a party the judge shall order witnesses excluded so that they cannot hear the testimony of other witnesses, and he may make the order on his own motion. This rule does not authorize exclusion of (1) a party who is a natural person, or (2) an officer or employee of a party which is not a natural person designated as its representative by its attorney, or (3) a person whose presence is shown by a party to be essential to the presentation of his cause.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 48.Annotations  It is permissible for a law enforcement officer, who will also be called to testify, to be present during a trial, even where a sequestration order has been entered. State v. Freeman, 267 Neb. 737, 677 N.W.2d 164 (2004). In an attorney disciplinary proceeding, the attorney's client who was also the complaining witness in the proceeding was an essential witness under subsection (3) of this section. State ex rel. NSBA v. Miller, 258 Neb. 181, 602 N.W.2d 486 (1999). Sequestration order not violated by presence of State's psychiatrist who was not to be called as a witness at trial. State v. Ryan, 233 Neb. 74, 444 N.W.2d 610 (1989). A psychiatrist or psychologist may be present in the courtroom in contravention of a sequestration order upon a showing that his or her presence is essential to the presentation of a party's case. State v. Jackson, 231 Neb. 207, 435 N.W.2d 893 (1989). Defendant's request to sequester a witness who was the prosecutrix and victim, held properly denied under exception in subsection (3) hereof. State v. Eynon, 197 Neb. 734, 250 N.W.2d 658 (1977). The general rule is that witnesses shall be excluded from a proceeding at the request of a party; this rule has certain exceptions, including a person whose presence is shown by a party to be essential to the presentation of its cause. In re Interest of Dennis W., 14 Neb. App. 827, 717 N.W.2d 488 (2006).
NE Code § 27-704 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-704 - Rule 704. Opinion on ultimate issue.

27-704.  Rule 704. Opinion on ultimate issue.Testimony in the form of an opinion or inference otherwise admissible is not objectionable because it embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 52. Annotations  This section abolished the "ultimate issue" rule in Nebraska. Reiber v. County of Gage, 303 Neb. 325, 928 N.W.2d 916 (2019). Under this section, a witness may not give an opinion as to how the case should be decided, but, rather, must leave the conclusions to be drawn by the trier of fact, because such opinions are not helpful. Reiber v. County of Gage, 303 Neb. 325, 928 N.W.2d 916 (2019). Under this section, the basic approach to opinions, lay and expert, is to admit them when helpful to the trier of fact. Reiber v. County of Gage, 303 Neb. 325, 928 N.W.2d 916 (2019). The "ultimate issue rule," which prohibited witnesses from giving opinions or conclusions on an ultimate fact in issue because such testimony, it was believed, usurps the function or invades the province of the jury, was abolished in Nebraska by this section. State v. Rocha, 295 Neb. 716, 890 N.W.2d 178 (2017). Under this section, the basic approach to opinions, lay and expert, is to admit them when helpful to the trier of fact. State v. Rocha, 295 Neb. 716, 890 N.W.2d 178 (2017). An otherwise admissible expert's opinion is not objectionable because the opinion embraces an ultimate issue to be decided by the trier of fact. State v. Reynolds, 235 Neb. 662, 457 N.W.2d 405 (1990); State v. Rotella, 196 Neb. 741, 246 N.W.2d 74 (1976). This section must be read in conjunction with sections 27-702, and 27-401 to 27-403, for this section does not render all expert testimony admissible. Under this section, the test is not whether the expert's opinion or inference invades the province of the jury, but whether the opinion or inference is otherwise admissible and will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or determine a fact in issue under section 27-702. State v. Reynolds, 235 Neb. 662, 457 N.W.2d 405 (1990). Auto manufacturer's expert witness entitled to present illustrative experiment and to testify regarding an ultimate issue of fact. Shover v. General Motors Corp., 198 Neb. 470, 253 N.W.2d 299 (1977). Possible modification of rule relating to opinion of investigator as to point of impact discussed but not applied retrospectively. Rawlings v. Andersen, 195 Neb. 686, 240 N.W.2d 568 (1976).
NE Code § 27-706 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-706 - Rule 706. Judge appointed experts; procedure; compensation; disclosure of appointment; parties may call experts of own selection.

27-706.  Rule 706. Judge appointed experts; procedure; compensation; disclosure of appointment; parties may call experts of own selection.(1) The judge may on his own motion or on the motion of any party enter an order to show why expert witnesses should not be appointed, and may request the parties to submit nominations. The judge may appoint any expert witnesses agreed upon by the parties, and may appoint witnesses of his own selection. An expert witness shall not be appointed by the judge unless he consents to act. A witness so appointed shall be informed of his duties by the judge in writing, a copy of which shall be filed with the clerk, or at a conference in which the parties shall have opportunity to participate. A witness so appointed shall advise the parties of his findings, if any; his deposition may be taken by any party; and he may be called to testify by the judge or any party. He shall be subject to cross-examination by each party, including a party calling him as a witness.(2) Expert witnesses so appointed are entitled to reasonable compensation in whatever sum the judge may allow. The compensation thus fixed is payable from funds which may be provided by law in criminal cases and by the opposing parties in equal portions to the clerk of the court in civil cases at a time fixed by the court and thereafter charged in like manner as other costs.(3) In the exercise of his discretion, the judge may authorize disclosure to the jury of the fact that the court appointed the expert witness.(4) Nothing in this rule limits the parties in calling expert witnesses of their own selection.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 54. Annotations If proposed expert testimony is fundamentally flawed by the expert's own admission, it is not an abuse of discretion for the trial court to refuse to appoint the expert under this section when there is no showing that this shortcoming in the expert's proposed testimony has been remedied. State v. Quezada, 20 Neb. App. 836, 834 N.W.2d 258 (2013).
NE Code § 27-707 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-707 - Eyewitness identification and memory; expert witness; admissibility of testimony.

27-707.  Eyewitness identification and memory; expert witness; admissibility of testimony.The testimony of an expert witness regarding eyewitness identification and memory may be admitted in any criminal or civil proceeding pursuant to the rules governing admissibility of evidence set forth in the Nebraska Evidence Rules.Source Laws 2020, LB881, § 4.
NE Code § 27-802 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-802 - Rule 802. Hearsay rule.

27-802.  Rule 802. Hearsay rule.Hearsay is not admissible except as provided by these rules, by other rules adopted by the statutes of the State of Nebraska, or by the discovery rules of the Supreme Court.Source   Laws 1975, LB 279, § 56;  Laws 2000, LB 921, § 29. Annotations  The Nebraska Evidence Rules provide that hearsay is admissible when authorized by the statutes of the State of Nebraska. In re Application No. OP-0003, 303 Neb. 872, 932 N.W.2d 653 (2019). The language of section 25-1273.01, in combination with this section, indicates a clear intention by the Legislature to create an independent avenue to admit deposition testimony. Walton v. Patil, 279 Neb. 974, 783 N.W.2d 438 (2010). A trial judge does not have discretion to admit inadmissible hearsay statements. State v. Draganescu, 276 Neb. 448, 755 N.W.2d 57 (2008). Apart from rulings under the residual hearsay exception, an appellate court reviews for clear error the factual findings underpinning a trial court's hearsay ruling and reviews de novo the court's ultimate determination to admit evidence over a hearsay objection. State v. Draganescu, 276 Neb. 448, 755 N.W.2d 57 (2008). With certain exceptions, hearsay evidence is not admissible. In re Interest of Constance G., 254 Neb. 96, 575 N.W.2d 133 (1998). Medical reports produced out of court are hearsay. Vacanti v. Master Electronics Corp., 245 Neb. 586, 514 N.W.2d 319 (1994). An insurer's estimate of the cost of repairing damage to a vehicle, without further testimony by the insurer or the repair person, is inadmissible hearsay testimony. State v. Larkin, 222 Neb. 398, 383 N.W.2d 804 (1986). Facts of the case held to be sufficient to place young child's statement as within the hearsay exceptions. State v. Roy, 214 Neb. 204, 333 N.W.2d 398 (1983). Hearsay evidence is not admissible except as otherwise provided by the statutes of the state. State v. Williams, 203 Neb. 649, 279 N.W.2d 847 (1979).
NE Code § 27-805 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-805 - Rule 805. Hearsay within hearsay.

27-805.  Rule 805. Hearsay within hearsay.Hearsay included within hearsay is not excluded under the hearsay rule if each part of the combined statements conforms with an exception to the hearsay rule provided in these rules.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 59. Annotations  Police complaint report admitted into evidence was not hearsay within hearsay because each part of the combined statements conformed with an exception to the hearsay rule. State v. Wilson, 225 Neb. 466, 406 N.W.2d 123 (1987). A child sexual assault victim's statements, as relayed to a doctor by a forensic examiner and testified to by a doctor, were admissible even though they were double hearsay because each part of the combined statements conformed with an exception to the hearsay rule. State v. Edwards, 28 Neb. App. 893, 949 N.W.2d 799 (2020).
NE Code § 27-806 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-806 - Rule 806. Attacking and supporting credibility of declarant; opportunity to explain; examine declarant.

27-806.  Rule 806. Attacking and supporting credibility of declarant; opportunity to explain; examine declarant.When a hearsay statement or a statement defined in subdivision (4)(b)(iii), (iv), or (v) of section 27-801 has been admitted in evidence, the credibility of the declarant may be attacked, and if attacked may be supported by any evidence which would be admissible for those purposes if declarant had testified as a witness. Evidence of a statement or conduct by the declarant at any time, inconsistent with his hearsay statement, is not subject to any requirement that he may have been afforded an opportunity to deny or explain. If the party against whom a hearsay statement has been admitted calls the declarant as a witness, the party is entitled to examine him on the statement as if under cross-examination.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 60. Annotations  Under this section, if a hearsay statement is admitted in evidence, a party may discredit the out-of-court declarant by utilizing recognized methods of impeachment. State v. Morrow, 273 Neb. 592, 731 N.W.2d 558 (2007). Under this section, the declarant of a hearsay statement may be impeached by the introduction of a prior or subsequent statement made by the declarant that is inconsistent with the hearsay statement already admitted at trial. State v. Morrow, 273 Neb. 592, 731 N.W.2d 558 (2007).
NE Code § 27-903 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-903 - Rule 903. Subscribing witness testimony; when necessary.

27-903.  Rule 903. Subscribing witness testimony; when necessary.The testimony of a subscribing witness is not necessary to authenticate a writing unless required by the laws of the jurisdiction whose laws govern the validity of the writing.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 63.
NE Code § 27-1001 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-1001 - Rule 1001. Definitions; writings and recordings, photographs, original, and duplicate.

27-1001.  Rule 1001. Definitions; writings and recordings, photographs, original, and duplicate.For purposes of this article the following definitions are applicable:(1) Writings and recordings consist of letters, words, or numbers, or their equivalent, set down by handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, magnetic impulse, mechanical or electronic recording, or other form of data compilation;(2) Photographs include still photographs, X-ray films, video tapes, and motion pictures;(3) An original of a writing or recording is the writing or recording itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by a person executing or issuing it. An original of a photograph includes the negative or any print therefrom. If data are stored in a computer or similar device, any printout or other output readable by sight, shown to reflect the data accurately, is an original; and(4) A duplicate is a counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, or from the same matrix, or by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures, or by mechanical or electronic rerecording, or by chemical reproduction, or by other equivalent techniques which accurately reproduce the original.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 64. Annotations A bank photocopy of a processed check qualifies as a duplicate under subsection (4) of this section. Equitable Life v. Starr, 241 Neb. 609, 489 N.W.2d 857 (1992).
NE Code § 27-1003 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-1003 - Rule 1003. Admissibility of duplicate; when.

27-1003.  Rule 1003. Admissibility of duplicate; when.A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original unless (1) a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original or (2) in the circumstances it would be unfair to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 66. Annotations  A duplicate writing, as defined by subdivision (4) of section 27-1001, is admissible under this section to the same extent as an original writing without a showing that the original is lost or destroyed or is otherwise unavailable under the circumstances expressed in section 27-1004 regarding a lost or destroyed original. Equitable Life v. Starr, 241 Neb. 609, 489 N.W.2d 857 (1992). The burden of raising an issue as to the authenticity of the original or the unfairness of the circumstances is on the party opposing admission. State v. Frederiksen, 224 Neb. 653, 400 N.W.2d 225 (1987). Duplicates of defendant's bank checks were properly admissible where identified by bank official and authenticity of original checks not challenged. State v. Costello, 199 Neb. 43, 256 N.W.2d 97 (1977).
NE Code § 27-1004 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-1004 - Rule 1004. Admissibility of other evidence of contents; when.

27-1004.  Rule 1004. Admissibility of other evidence of contents; when.The original is not required, and other evidence of the contents of a writing, recording, or photograph is admissible if:(1) All originals are lost or have been destroyed, unless the proponent lost or destroyed them in bad faith; or(2) No original can be obtained by any available judicial process or procedure; or(3) At a time when an original was under the control of the party against whom offered, he was put on notice, by the pleadings or otherwise, that the contents would be a subject of proof at the hearing, and he does not produce the original at the hearing; or(4) The writing, recording, or photograph is not closely related to a controlling issue.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 67.Annotations  The language of this section, which carves out exceptions to the best evidence rule, makes exceptions for only specific instances of unavailability, such as where the original has been lost or destroyed, cannot be obtained by judicial means, or is not closely related to a controlling issue. State v. Kula, 260 Neb. 183, 616 N.W.2d 313 (2000). Absent evidence of bad faith on the part of university officials, secondary evidence of test scores is admissible where it is shown that the original writings have been lost or destroyed. State ex rel. Mercurio v. Board of Regents, 213 Neb. 251, 329 N.W.2d 87 (1983). The existence of a written employment contract, alleged by plaintiff and denied by defendant, was properly a question for the jury. Montgomery v. Quantum Labs, Inc., 198 Neb. 160, 251 N.W.2d 892 (1977).
NE Code § 27-1005 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-1005 - Rule 1005. Public records; contents, how proved.

27-1005.  Rule 1005. Public records; contents, how proved.The contents of an official record, or of a document authorized to be recorded or filed and actually recorded or filed, including data compilations in any form, if otherwise admissible, may be proved by copy, certified as correct in accordance with section 27-902 or testified to be correct by a witness who has compared it with the original. If a copy which complies with the foregoing cannot be obtained by the exercise of reasonable diligence, then other evidence of the contents may be given.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 68.
NE Code § 27-1006 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-1006 - Rule 1006. Voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs; summaries; availability; orders.

27-1006.  Rule 1006. Voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs; summaries; availability; orders.The contents of voluminous writings, recordings, or photographs which cannot conveniently be examined in court may be presented in the form of a chart, summary, or calculation. The originals, or duplicates, shall be made available for examination or copying, or both, by other parties at a reasonable time and place. The judge may order that they be produced in court.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 69. Annotations  Requirements for admission of an exhibit into evidence pursuant to Neb. Evid. R. 1006 set out this case. Crowder v. Aurora Co-op Elev. Co., 223 Neb. 704, 393 N.W.2d 250 (1986). This section had no application to an exhibit listing persons for whom building moving services had been performed with enumeration of dates and charges, but oral testimony by one who had personal knowledge of the facts laid appropriate foundation for its admission. Groenewold v. Building Movers, Inc., 197 Neb. 187, 247 N.W.2d 629 (1976).
NE Code § 27-1007 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-1007 - Rule 1007. Contents of writings, recordings, or photographs; how proved.

27-1007.  Rule 1007. Contents of writings, recordings, or photographs; how proved.Contents of writings, recordings, or photographs may be proved by the testimony or deposition of the party against whom offered or by his written admission, without accounting for the nonproduction of the original.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 70.
NE Code § 27-1008 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-1008 - Rule 1008. Functions of judge and jury.

27-1008.  Rule 1008. Functions of judge and jury.When the admissibility of other evidence of contents of writings, recordings, or photographs under these rules depends upon the fulfillment of a condition of fact, the question whether the condition has been fulfilled is ordinarily for the judge to determine. However, when an issue is raised (1) whether the asserted writing ever existed, or (2) whether another writing, recording, or photograph produced at the trial is the original, or (3) whether other evidence of contents correctly reflects the contents, the issue is for the trier of fact to determine as in the case of other issues of fact.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 71. Annotations The existence of a written employment contract, alleged by plaintiff and denied by defendant, was properly a question for the jury. Montgomery v. Quantum Labs, Inc., 198 Neb. 160, 251 N.W.2d 892 (1977).
NE Code § 27-1102 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-1102 - Rule 1102. Act, when effective.

27-1102.  Rule 1102. Act, when effective.These rules shall apply in all trials commenced after December 31, 1975.Source  Laws 1975, LB 279, § 74.
NE Code § 27-1103 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 27 - Courts; Rules of Evidence|27-1103 - Rule 1103. Act, how cited.

27-1103.  Rule 1103. Act, how cited.These rules may be known and cited as the Nebraska Evidence Rules.Source   Laws 1975, LB 279, § 73;  Laws 2009, LB97, § 8;  Laws 2020, LB881, § 5.