reglab/housing_qa huggingface dataset:
NE Code § 25-10,110 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-10,110 - Order for delivery of property; issuance without court order; effect; taxation of costs.

25-10,110.  Order for delivery of property; issuance without court order; effect; taxation of costs.Any order for the delivery of property issued under section 25-1094 without the order of the court required thereby shall be set aside at the cost of the clerk issuing the same, and such clerk, as well as the plaintiff, shall also be liable in damages to the party injured.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 197, p. 424;   R.S.1913, § 7839;   C.S.1922, § 8783;   C.S.1929, § 20-10,110;   R.S.1943, § 25-10,110;   Laws 1973, LB 474, § 9.  Annotations  If order of delivery is issued without affidavit, the order may be set aside. Racine-Sattley Co. v. Meinen, 79 Neb. 33, 114 N.W. 602 (1908). Affidavit is prerequisite; without it, order is nullity and may be set aside on proper application. Case Threshing Machine Co. v. Rosso, 78 Neb. 184, 110 N.W. 686 (1907).
NE Code § 25-1101 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1101 - Issues; kinds.

25-1101.  Issues; kinds.Issues arise on the pleadings where a fact or conclusion of law is maintained by one party and controverted by the other. They are of two kinds: (1) Of law; (2) of fact.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 277, p. 440;   R.S.1913, § 7840;   C.S.1922, § 8784;   C.S.1929, § 20-1101;   R.S.1943, § 25-1101. Annotations The pleadings before the trial court at the time of decision form the issues of the case. State ex rel. Douglas v. Schroeder, 212 Neb. 562, 324 N.W.2d 391 (1982).
NE Code § 25-1102 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1102 - Issue of fact; how formed.

25-1102.  Issue of fact; how formed.An issue of fact arises upon a material allegation in a pleading that is denied by a responsive pleading or that is considered as denied or avoided because no responsive pleading is required or permitted.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 278, p. 440;   R.S.1913, § 7841;   C.S.1922, § 8785;   C.S.1929, § 20-1102;   R.S.1943, § 25-1102;  Laws 2002, LB 876, § 24.  Annotations  A general denial in answer puts in issue only such pleaded facts as are necessary to enable plaintiff to recover. Luikart v. Bank of Benkelman, 132 Neb. 501, 272 N.W. 324 (1937). Party is as much entitled to be heard in trial court upon questions of law as upon issues of fact. Wagener v. Whitmore, 79 Neb. 558, 113 N.W. 238 (1907). Where facts, though not conflicting, would cause impartial minds to draw different conclusions, question to be determined is not one of law for court, but one of fact. Southern Pine Lumber Co. v. Fries, 1 Neb. Unof. 691, 96 N.W. 71 (1901).
NE Code § 25-1103 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1103 - Trial, defined.

25-1103.  Trial, defined.A trial is a judicial examination of the issues, whether of law or of fact in an action.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 279, p. 440;   R.S.1913, § 7842;   C.S.1922, § 8786;   C.S.1929, § 20-1103;   R.S.1943, § 25-1103. Annotations  Hearing on a motion to dissolve an attachment is a trial. J. R. Watkins Co. v. Sorenson, 166 Neb. 364, 88 N.W.2d 902 (1958). A trial is a judicial examination of the issues, whether of law or fact. Krepcik v. Interstate Transit Lines, 151 Neb. 663, 38 N.W.2d 533 (1949). Where court decides case upon merits, after introduction of evidence, it is a trial. Shipley v. McNeel, 149 Neb. 790, 32 N.W.2d 639 (1948). Hearing of motion to dissolve an attachment is a trial. Gibson v. Sidney, 50 Neb. 12, 69 N.W. 314 (1896). Trial of an impeachment does not include preferring of charges. State v. Hill, 37 Neb. 80, 55 N.W. 794 (1893).
NE Code § 25-1105 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1105 - Issues of fact triable to court.

25-1105.  Issues of fact triable to court.All other issues of fact shall be tried by the court, subject to its power to order any issue or issues to be tried by a jury, or referred as provided in this code.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 281, p. 441;   R.S.1913, § 7844;   C.S.1922, § 8788;   C.S.1929, § 20-1105;   R.S.1943, § 25-1105. Annotations  Claims brought under this section may be equitable in nature, and in such case the court may submit questions of fact to the jury, but the jury's determination is only an advisory one. In re Estate of Layton, 212 Neb. 518, 323 N.W.2d 817 (1982). Appeals in guardianship matters are heard de novo in Supreme Court. Cass v. Pense, 155 Neb. 792, 54 N.W.2d 68 (1952). Contest over sufficiency of election by widow to take under statute was triable de novo in Supreme Court. In re Estate of Bergren, 154 Neb. 289, 47 N.W.2d 582 (1951). In suits not triable by jury as of right, a verdict of a jury is advisory only. In re Guardianship of Warner, 137 Neb. 25, 288 N.W. 39 (1939). Jury cannot be demanded on adverse possession issue in suit to quiet title. Krumm v. Pillard, 104 Neb. 335, 177 N.W. 171 (1920). Verdict in equity case on issue of fact is advisory only. Bank of Stockham v. Alter, 61 Neb. 359, 85 N.W. 300 (1901). Issues in equity causes are triable to the court without a jury. Smith v. Perry, 52 Neb. 738, 73 N.W. 282 (1897). Power of court of equity to obtain verdict of jury on issues of fact is preserved by the code. Omaha Fire Ins. Co. v. Thompson, 50 Neb. 580, 70 N.W. 30 (1897).
NE Code § 25-1106 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1106 - Formation of jury; applicability of law.

25-1106.  Formation of jury; applicability of law.The general mode of summoning, impaneling, challenging and swearing the jury is not changed by this code.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 282, p. 441;   R.S.1913, § 7845;   C.S.1922, § 8789;   C.S.1929, § 20-1106;   R.S.1943, § 25-1106. Annotations  Peremptory challenges and challenges for cause are provided to safeguard constitutional right of trial by jury in criminal case. Oden v. State, 166 Neb. 729, 90 N.W.2d 356 (1958). In examination of venireman upon voir dire, he will not be deemed to have deceived counsel as to relations with opposing counsel, when he admits relations and answers questions truthfully. Blakely v. Omaha & C. B. St. Ry. Co., 94 Neb. 119, 142 N.W. 525 (1913). Error cannot be predicated upon overruling of challenge to juror for cause when record does not show that complaining party has exhausted all his peremptory challenges. Olmstead v. Noll, 82 Neb. 147, 117 N.W. 102 (1908). That juror has served on another case growing out of same state of facts does not necessarily disqualify him. Granite State Fire Ins. Co. v. Buckstaff Bros. Mfg. Co., 53 Neb. 123, 73 N.W. 544 (1897). The improper excusing of a juror will not work a reversal unless all peremptory challenges are used. Smith v. Meyers, 52 Neb. 70, 71 N.W. 1006 (1897). Selection of talesmen is entrusted to the discretion of the sheriff. Pflueger v. State, 46 Neb. 493, 64 N.W. 1094 (1895).
NE Code § 25-1107.01 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1107.01 - Jurors; permitted to take notes; use; destruction.

25-1107.01.  Jurors; permitted to take notes; use; destruction.Jurors shall be permitted, but not required, to take notes. The notes may be used during the jury's deliberations and shall be treated as confidential between the juror making them and the other jurors. The notes shall not be preserved in any form. The trial judge shall ensure the confidentiality of the notes during the course of the trial and the jury's deliberations and shall instruct the bailiff to immediately mutilate and destroy such notes upon return of the verdict.Source  Laws 2008, LB1014, § 71;  Laws 2020, LB387, § 37.
NE Code § 25-1109 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1109 - Cause submitted; action and conduct of jury.

25-1109.  Cause submitted; action and conduct of jury.When the case is finally submitted to the jury, they may decide in court or retire for deliberation. If they retire, they must be kept together in some convenient place, under the charge of an officer, until they agree upon a verdict, or are discharged by the court, subject to the discretion of the court to permit them to separate temporarily at night and at their meals. The officer having them under his charge shall not suffer any communication to be made to them, or make any himself, except to ask them if they have agreed upon their verdict, unless by order of the court, and he shall not, before the verdict is rendered, communicate to any person the state of their deliberations or the verdict agreed upon.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 285, p. 442;   R.S.1913, § 7848;   C.S.1922, § 8792;   C.S.1929, § 20-1109;   R.S.1943, § 25-1109. Annotations  Where bailiff in charge of jury learned that certain juror was voting for acquittal and thereupon went into jury room and by his attitude and statements influenced juror, a new trial was required. Bramlett v. State, 129 Neb. 180, 261 N.W. 166 (1935). Allowing jury to separate temporarily during the night is a salutary provision for comfort of jury and permissible at discretion of trial judge. Wiegand v. Lincoln Traction Co., 123 Neb. 766, 244 N.W. 298 (1932). Fact that there were law reports, with markers therein at cases similar to the case in trial, in jury room, was not error in absence of showing that some juror read them. In re Estate of Wilson, 114 Neb. 593, 208 N.W. 961 (1926). It is duty of jury to follow instructions given by court. Union State Bank v. Hutton, 62 Neb. 664, 87 N.W. 533 (1901); Barton v. Shull, 62 Neb. 570, 87 N.W. 322 (1901). It was error for juror to state to fellow jurors facts within his own knowledge. Ewing v. Hoffine, 55 Neb. 131, 75 N.W. 537 (1898). It is not reversible error to leave jury in charge of deputy sheriff not specially sworn for that purpose. Deranlieu v. Jandt, 37 Neb. 532, 56 N.W. 299 (1893).
NE Code § 25-1110 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1110 - Jury; separation; admonition of court.

25-1110.  Jury; separation; admonition of court.If the jury are permitted to separate either during the trial or after the case is submitted to them, they shall be admonished by the court that it is their duty not to converse with or suffer themselves to be addressed by any other person on the subject of the trial, and that it is their duty not to form or express any opinion thereon until the cause is finally submitted to them.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 286, p. 442;   R.S.1913, § 7849;   C.S.1922, § 8793;   C.S.1929, § 20-1110;   R.S.1943, § 25-1110. Annotations This section does not apply to criminal prosecutions. Sundahl v. State, 154 Neb. 550, 48 N.W.2d 689 (1951).
NE Code § 25-1112 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1112 - Requested instruction; how modified.

25-1112.  Requested instruction; how modified.If the court refuses a written instruction, as demanded, but gives the same with a modification, which the court may do, such modification shall not be by interlineation or erasure, but shall be well defined and shall follow some such characterizing words as "changed thus," which words shall themselves indicate that the same was refused as demanded.Source   Laws 1875, § 2, p. 77;   R.S.1913, § 7851;   C.S.1922, § 8795;   C.S.1929, § 20-1112;   R.S.1943, § 25-1112. Annotations  Where trial court refuses to give a proffered instruction, and so indicates on the margin thereof, it is not interlineation or erasure to embody statements therefrom in one of the court's instructions. Merritt v. Ash Grove Lime & Portland Cement Co., 136 Neb. 52, 285 N.W. 97 (1939). Modification of requested instruction; exception must be noted, not to modification merely, but to manner of making same. Hunt v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. R. Co., 95 Neb. 746, 146 N.W. 986 (1914). Action of trial court in modifying instruction may not be reviewed in absence of exception. Denise v. Omaha, 49 Neb. 750, 69 N.W. 119 (1896).
NE Code § 25-1113 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1113 - Given or refused instructions; how indicated; requirements.

25-1113.  Given or refused instructions; how indicated; requirements.The court must read over all the instructions which it intends to give, and none others, to the jury, and must announce them as given, and shall announce as refused, without reading to the jury, all those which are refused, and must write the words given, or refused, as the case may be, on the margin of each instruction.Source   Laws 1875, § 3, p. 77;   R.S.1913, § 7852;   C.S.1922, § 8796;   C.S.1929, § 20-1113;   R.S.1943, § 25-1113. Annotations  Endorsement on instruction "given as modified" was not in accord with statute, but was not prejudicial. Asher v. Coca Cola Bottling Co., 172 Neb. 855, 112 N.W.2d 252 (1961). Instructions given should be so endorsed by trial judge. Segebart v. Gregory, 160 Neb. 64, 69 N.W.2d 315 (1955). Giving of oral instruction was reversible error. Dow v. Legg, 120 Neb. 271, 231 N.W. 747 (1930), 74 A.L.R. 5 (1930). Instructions must be read to jury in open court. Taulborg v. Andresen, 119 Neb. 273, 228 N.W. 528 (1930), 67 A.L.R. 642 (1930). Failure to write word "given" on instruction read to jury is not ground for reversal when not prejudicial. Clasen v. Pruhs, 69 Neb. 278, 95 N.W. 640 (1903); McClellan v. Hein, 56 Neb. 600, 77 N.W. 120 (1898); Home Fire Ins. Co. v. Decker, 55 Neb. 346, 75 N.W. 841 (1898). Instructions must be considered together. To review alleged errors in refusing instructions they must be called to attention of trial court by motion for new trial. Schmitt & Bros. Co. v. Mahoney, 60 Neb. 20, 82 N.W. 99 (1900). Disregard of provisions is ground of reversal if excepted to. Tracey v. State, 46 Neb. 361, 64 N.W. 1069 (1895); Omaha & Florence L. & T. Co. v. Hansen, 32 Neb. 449, 49 N.W. 456 (1891); Gillen v. Riley, 27 Neb. 158, 42 N.W. 1054 (1889). Record must show ruling on instruction, or action of court will not be reviewed. It is not error to fail to mark "given" or "refused." Jolly v. State, 43 Neb. 857, 62 N.W. 300 (1895); City of Chadron v. Glover, 43 Neb. 732, 62 N.W. 62 (1895). Failure to read instructions to jury is reversible error. McDuffie v. Bentley, 27 Neb. 380, 43 N.W. 123 (1889). A trial court's failure to mark a jury instruction as "given" or "refused" pursuant to this section is not available as error on appeal in the absence of an objection made on these statutory grounds at trial. Schuemann v. Menard, Inc., 27 Neb. App. 977, 938 N.W.2d 378 (2020).
NE Code § 25-1117 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1117 - Jury; when discharged.

25-1117.  Jury; when discharged.The jury may be discharged by the court on account of the sickness of a juror, or other accident or calamity requiring their discharge, or by consent of both parties, or after they have been kept together until it satisfactorily appears that there is no probability of their agreeing.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 288, p. 442;   R.S.1913, § 7856;   C.S.1922, § 8800;   C.S.1929, § 20-1117;   R.S.1943, § 25-1117.
NE Code § 25-1118 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1118 - Jury; retrial on discharge.

25-1118.  Jury; retrial on discharge.In all cases where the jury are discharged during the trial, or after the cause is submitted to them, it may be tried again immediately or at a future time as the court may direct.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 289, p. 442;   R.S.1913, § 7857;   C.S.1922, § 8801;   C.S.1929, § 20-1118;   R.S.1943, § 25-1118.
NE Code § 25-1119 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1119 - Assessment of amount of recovery.

25-1119.  Assessment of amount of recovery.When, by the verdict, either party is entitled to recover money of the adverse party, the jury in their verdict must assess the amount of recovery.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 295, p. 443;   R.S.1913, § 7858;   C.S.1922, § 8802;   C.S.1929, § 20-1119;   R.S.1943, § 25-1119. Annotations  Verdict for the plaintiff in amount of "no money" is in effect no verdict at all. Bushey v. French, 171 Neb. 809, 108 N.W.2d 237 (1961). Where jury finds for plaintiff on its cause of action, and also for defendant on its counterclaim or setoff, verdict must show amount of each finding. Horse Shoe Lake Drainage Dist. v. Crane Co., 112 Neb. 323, 199 N.W. 526 (1924). Court cannot disregard verdict and enter such judgment as evidence warrants; if verdict is not sustained by evidence, remedy is by motion for new trial. Kenesaw Mill & E. Co. v. Aufdenkamp, 106 Neb. 246, 183 N.W. 294 (1921). Court may in action of debt add interest when such appears from verdict to be so intended by jury. Wiruth v. Lashmett, 85 Neb. 286, 123 N.W. 427 (1909). Verdict may assess different amounts against different defendants. Lininger & Metcalf Co. v. Webb, 51 Neb. 10, 70 N.W. 519 (1897). Failure to include in judgment interest allowed by jury on verdict was not prejudicial to defendant. Wiseman v. Ziegler, 41 Neb. 886, 60 N.W. 320 (1894).
NE Code § 25-1121 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1121 - Special verdicts; when allowed; procedure; filing; record.

25-1121.  Special verdicts; when allowed; procedure; filing; record.In every action for the recovery of money only or specific real property, the jury, in their discretion, may render a general or special verdict. In all other cases the court may direct the jury to find a special verdict, in writing, upon all or any of the issues and in all cases may instruct them, if they render a general verdict, to find upon particular questions of fact to be stated in writing, and may direct a written finding thereon. The special verdict or finding must be filed with the clerk and entered upon the record.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 293, p. 443;   R.S.1913, § 7860;   C.S.1922, § 8804;   C.S.1929, § 20-1121;   R.S.1943, § 25-1121;  Laws 2018, LB193, § 13.  Annotations  1. Special verdict 2. Trial court discretion 3. Miscellaneous 1. Special verdict Under circumstances of case, rendition of special verdict was proper. Baum v. County of Scotts Bluff, 172 Neb. 225, 109 N.W.2d 295 (1961). Special findings, based upon conflicting evidence, will not be disturbed. Norfolk Beet-Sugar Co. v. Hight, 59 Neb. 100, 80 N.W. 276 (1899). 2. Trial court discretion Trial court may submit special verdict in negligence action. Carlson v. Hanson, 166 Neb. 96, 88 N.W.2d 140 (1958). Court may direct submission of special issues to jury, or jury may render special verdict without direction from the court. McGrew Machine Co. v. One Spring Alarm Clock Co., 124 Neb. 93, 245 N.W. 263 (1932). Submission of special findings is within the discretion of trial court. Buel v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 81 Neb. 430, 116 N.W. 299 (1908); American Fire Ins. Co. v. Landfare, 56 Neb. 482, 76 N.W. 1068 (1898); Phoenix Ins. Co. v. King, 52 Neb. 562, 72 N.W. 855 (1897); Hedrick v. Strauss, Uhlman & Guthman, 42 Neb. 485, 60 N.W. 928 (1894); Reed v. McRill, 41 Neb. 206, 59 N.W. 775 (1894). 3. Miscellaneous This section has no application to criminal trials. State v. Bradley, 210 Neb. 882, 317 N.W.2d 99 (1982). Quotient verdict is not void in absence of previous agreement that it should be controlling. Herbert v. Katzberg, 104 Neb. 395, 177 N.W. 650 (1920). Objection that special findings are not signed is waived unless made before they are received and recorded. Thompson v. Thompson, 49 Neb. 157, 68 N.W. 372 (1896). It is error for court to enter judgment on general verdict when material special findings are returned unanswered. Sandwich Enterprise Co. v. West, 42 Neb. 722, 60 N.W. 1012 (1894); Doom v. Walker, 15 Neb. 339, 18 N.W. 138 (1884). In absence of abuse of discretion, refusal to submit special findings is not error. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Lawler, 40 Neb. 356, 58 N.W. 968 (1894).
NE Code § 25-1122 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1122 - General and special verdicts; definitions; form of special verdicts generally.

25-1122.  General and special verdicts; definitions; form of special verdicts generally.The verdict of a jury is either general or special. A general verdict is that by which they pronounce, generally, upon all or any of the issues either in favor of the plaintiff or defendant. A special verdict is that by which the jury finds the facts only. It must present the facts as established by the evidence, and not the evidence to prove them; and they must be so presented that nothing remains to the court but to draw from them conclusions of law.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 292, p. 443;   R.S.1913, § 7861;   C.S.1922, § 8805;   C.S.1929, § 20-1122;   R.S.1943, § 25-1122. Annotations  Where the jury returned a general verdict in favor of an injured railroad employee on his claims for lost earnings and benefits, it was presumed on appeal that the jury found in favor of the employee on all issues, including lost wages. Heckman v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Ry. Co., 286 Neb. 453, 837 N.W.2d 532 (2013). A special verdict is one by which the jury finds the facts only. Baum v. County of Scotts Bluff, 172 Neb. 225, 109 N.W.2d 295 (1961). Where special verdict found that negligence of plaintiff was more than slight and negligence of defendant less than gross, dismissal of action was proper. Carlson v. Hanson, 166 Neb. 96, 88 N.W.2d 140 (1958). Where jury finds amount of principal debt, court can compute interest thereon and render judgment for amount due. Wiruth v. Lashmett, 85 Neb. 286, 123 N.W. 427 (1909). Error cannot be predicated, in absence of proper request, on failure to submit additional questions. Town v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co., 50 Neb. 768, 70 N.W. 402 (1897). Where special finding is a conclusion or an inference drawn from others, it may be disregarded. Johnston v. Milwaukee & Wyoming Inv. Co., 49 Neb. 68, 68 N.W. 383 (1896). Where special findings do not cover entire case, court may refuse to submit same. First Nat. Bank of North Bend v. Miltonberger, 33 Neb. 847, 51 N.W. 232 (1892).
NE Code § 25-1124 (2021)
2021 Nebraska Revised Statutes|Chapter 25 - Courts; Civil Procedure|25-1124 - Rendition of verdict; polling of jury.

25-1124.  Rendition of verdict; polling of jury.When the jury have agreed upon their verdict, they must be conducted into court, their names called by the clerk, and the verdict rendered by the foreman. When the verdict is announced, either party may require the jury to be polled, which is done by the clerk asking each juror if it is his verdict. If any one answer in the negative, the jury must again be sent out for further deliberation.Source   R.S.1867, Code § 290, p. 443;   R.S.1913, § 7863;   C.S.1922, § 8807;   C.S.1929, § 20-1124;   R.S.1943, § 25-1124. Annotations  Verdict of jury should be received only when judge is present and the court open for the transaction of business; objection to verdict on ground that it was irregularly received by trial court cannot be properly raised for first time in appellate court. In re Estate of Lodge, 123 Neb. 531, 243 N.W. 781 (1932). Provision that names of jurors must be called by clerk is directory merely. Bryan v. Manchester, 111 Neb. 748, 197 N.W. 425 (1924). This section does not apply to a criminal prosecution. Evers v. State, 84 Neb. 708, 121 N.W. 1005 (1909). Mere statement by foreman in open court that jury has agreed, without stating nature of decision, is not a verdict. Union P. R. R. Co. v. Connolly, 77 Neb. 254, 109 N.W. 368 (1906). Where upon reading of sealed verdict same is challenged by a juror and jury is subsequently unable to agree, it was properly discharged. Lincoln Trac. Co. v. Heller, 72 Neb. 127, 100 N.W. 197 (1904). By agreement, jury may after agreeing, seal verdict and deliver to officer in charge; when opened in their presence, if defective, jury may be sent out to correct. Rogers v. Sample, 28 Neb. 141, 44 N.W. 86 (1889). When polling the jury, the trial court is not required to go beyond the procedure specified in this section by inquiring into the basis for the jury's determination of the percentage of a party's negligence, because such inquiry would invade the province of the jury. Anis v. BryanLGH Health System, 14 Neb. App. 372, 707 N.W.2d 60 (2005).