Nebraska Statutes
§ 77-5016 — Hearing or proceeding; commission; powers and duties; false statement; penalty; costs
Nebraska § 77-5016
JurisdictionNebraska
Ch. 77Revenue and Taxation
This text of Nebraska § 77-5016 (Hearing or proceeding; commission; powers and duties; false statement; penalty; costs) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 77-5016 (2026).
Text
Any hearing or proceeding of the commission shall be conducted as an informal hearing unless a formal hearing is granted as determined by the commission according to its rules and regulations. In any hearing or proceeding heard by the commission:
(1)The commission may admit and give probative effect to
evidence which possesses probative value commonly accepted by reasonably prudent
persons in the conduct of their affairs excluding incompetent, irrelevant,
immaterial, and unduly repetitious evidence and shall give effect to the privilege
rules of evidence in sections 27-501 to 27-513 but shall not otherwise be
bound by the usual common-law or statutory rules of evidence except during
a formal hearing. Any party to an appeal filed under section 77-5007 may request
a formal hearing by
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Brenner v. BANNER COUNTY BD. OF EQUAL.
753 N.W.2d 802 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2008)
Betty L. Green Living Trust & Richard R. Green Living Trust v. Morrill Cnty. Bd. of Equal.
299 Neb. 933 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2018)
Bethesda Foundation v. Buffalo County Board of Equalization
640 N.W.2d 398 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2002)
Darnall Ranch, Inc. v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal.
753 N.W.2d 819 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2008)
Zabawa v. Douglas County Board of Equalization
757 N.W.2d 522 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 2008)
City of York v. York County Board of Equalization
664 N.W.2d 445 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2003)
Bottorf v. Clay County Board of Equalization
580 N.W.2d 561 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 1998)
Schuyler Apartment v. Colfax County
783 N.W.2d 587 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2010)
Krusemark v. Thurston County Board of Equalization
624 N.W.2d 328 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 2001)
Krusemark v. THURSTON COUNTY BD. OF EQUAL.
624 N.W.2d 328 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 2001)
Cain v. Custer Cty. Bd. of Equal.
291 Neb. 730 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2015)
Vitalix, Inc. v. Box Butte County Board of Equalization
786 N.W.2d 326 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2010)
Harrison Square Partnership v. Sarpy County Board of Equalization
574 N.W.2d 180 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 1998)
Upper Republican Natural Res. Dist. v. Dundy Cnty. Bd. of Equal.
300 Neb. 256 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2018)
J.C. Penney Co. v. Lancaster County Board of Equalization
578 N.W.2d 465 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 1998)
Lancaster County Board of Equalization v. Condev West, Inc.
581 N.W.2d 452 (Nebraska Court of Appeals, 1998)
Upper Republican NRD v. Dundy Cty. Bd. of Equal.
300 Neb. 256 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2018)
Agena v. Lancaster Cty. Bd. of Equal.
276 Neb. 851 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2008)
Garvey Elevators, Inc. v. Adams County Board of Equalization
621 N.W.2d 518 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2001)
Betty L. Green Living Trust v. Morrill Cty. Bd. of Equal.
299 Neb. 933 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 2018)
Legislative History
Source: Laws 1995, LB 490, § 16; Laws 1997, LB 397, § 38; Laws 1999, LB 140, § 4; Laws 2000, LB 968, § 75; Laws 2001, LB 170, § 22; Laws 2001, LB 419, § 1; Laws 2001, LB 465, § 7; Laws 2002, LB 994, § 29; Laws 2003, LB 291, § 9; Laws 2004, LB 973, § 51; Laws 2005, LB 15, § 9; Laws 2007, LB167, § 6; Laws 2010, LB877, § 9; Laws 2011, LB384, § 29.
Annotations: Where the only issue raised on appeal to the Nebraska Tax Equalization and Review Commission was whether a natural resources district's parcels were being used for a public purpose as required for property tax exemption, the commission lacked jurisdiction to consider questions beyond whether the parcels were being used for a public purpose, including whether the parcels were leased at fair market value and whether assessment of taxes to surface lessees would violate due process. Upper Republican NRD v. Dundy Cty. Bd. of Equal., 300 Neb. 256, 912 N.W.2d 796 (2018). The procedures for a hearing to show cause why an adjustment should not be made to a county's valuation of a class or subclass of real property are not governed by subdivision (4) of this section. Instead, the show cause hearing is part of equalization procedures under sections 77-5022, 77-5023, and 77-5026. County of Webster v. Nebraska Tax Equal. & Rev. Comm., 296 Neb. 751, 896 N.W.2d 887 (2017). The Tax Equalization and Review Commission determines de novo all questions raised in proceedings before it. Brenner v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal., 276 Neb. 275, 753 N.W.2d 802 (2008). The Tax Equalization and Review Commission is not required to accept any and all evidence offered during an informal hearing; it has some discretion in determining the probative value of proffered evidence and may exclude that which it determines to be incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial, and unduly repetitious. Brenner v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal., 276 Neb. 275, 753 N.W.2d 802 (2008). The Tax Equalization and Review Commission is not required to make specific findings with respect to arguments or issues which it does not deem significant or necessary to its determination. Brenner v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal., 276 Neb. 275, 753 N.W.2d 802 (2008). The taxpayer's burden is to present clear and convincing evidence to rebut the presumption that the Board of Equalization faithfully performed its valuation duties. Brenner v. Banner Cty. Bd. of Equal., 276 Neb. 275, 753 N.W.2d 802 (2008). A presumption exists that a board of equalization has faithfully performed its official duties and has acted upon sufficient competent evidence to justify its actions. This presumption remains until there is competent evidence to the contrary presented. Once the presumption has been rebutted, the burden shifts to the party requesting the exemption to prove its entitlement thereto. City of York v. York Cty. Bd. of Equal., 266 Neb. 297, 664 N.W.2d 445 (2003). The only material difference between an appeal from a board of equalization before the passage of LB 490 and after is that subsection (5) of this section allows the Tax Equalization and Review Commission to take judicial notice of general, technical, or scientific facts within its specialized knowledge or statistical information regarding general levels of assessment. J.C. Penney Co., Inc. v. Lancaster Cty. Bd. of Equal., 6 Neb. App. 838, 578 N.W.2d 465 (1998).
Nearby Sections
15
§ 77-1001
Act, how cited§ 77-1003
Definitions, where found§ 77-1004
Tax terms, meaning§ 77-1005
Approved cost, defined§ 77-1006
Approved project, defined§ 77-1007
Cultural development, defined§ 77-1008
Destination dining, defined§ 77-101
Definitions, where found§ 77-1010
Entitlement period, defined§ 77-1011
Full-service restaurant, defined§ 77-1012
Historical redevelopment, defined§ 77-1013
Investment, defined§ 77-1014
Lodging, definedCite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
Nebraska § 77-5016, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/statute/ne/77-5016.