Statute of Limitations for Breach of Fiduciary Duty in Nebraska

Overview

In Nebraska, a “breach of fiduciary duty” claim must be filed within the applicable statute of limitations (SOL) period. The state’s default SOL rule for many civil actions is found in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 13-919, which sets a time limit that typically governs when no more specific SOL applies.

Because Nebraska’s statute, based on the material reviewed here, does not provide a standalone, claim-type-specific SOL for “breach of fiduciary duty,” this guide uses the general/default period under § 13-919 as the governing rule. In other words, treat this as the baseline timeline unless a different Nebraska statute clearly controls the specific facts and cause of action.

Limitation period

Default SOL: 6 months (0.5 years)

Nebraska’s general rule in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 13-919 provides a 6-month SOL—equivalent to 0.5 years—for certain actions covered by that statute. Under the general/default approach, a breach of fiduciary duty claim generally must be filed within 6 months from the triggering event recognized by the statute’s terms.

What “triggering event” means in practice

The SOL countdown generally starts when the claim accrues under the governing statute. For § 13-919, accrual concepts are built into how Nebraska law characterizes the covered claim type and when the plaintiff suffers the legally relevant harm.

To translate that into day-to-day case management, you’ll typically want to identify:

• The date the fiduciary duty breach occurred (or the last date of the relevant wrongful conduct).
• The date the injury became clear (where the statute’s accrual language requires more than just the first moment of wrongdoing).
• Any date tied to notice/discovery requirements, if those are part of the statute’s accrual framework for the covered action.

Because SOL deadlines are unforgiving, a practical workflow is to compute (a) the earliest plausible accrual date and (b) the latest plausible accrual date consistent with your evidence, then decide how conservative your filing plan should be.

Quick timeline example (default SOL)

Below is an illustrative example of how the math usually gets handled when you apply the 6-month default rule:

Use these as framing only—the real issue is accurately selecting the accrual date under § 13-919 for your specific situation.

Key exceptions

Nebraska SOL rules can be affected by doctrines and statutes that either toll (pause) the deadline or apply a different time period. Even though no claim-type-specific “breach of fiduciary duty” sub-rule was identified here, you should still screen for these common exception categories:

1) Tolling and pauses

Some circumstances can pause the SOL. Tolling can arise from statutory tolling provisions or equitable doctrines recognized under Nebraska law. Examples of factual situations that sometimes trigger tolling (depending on the statute and the relationship to the claim) include:

• The plaintiff’s lack of legal capacity during the relevant period
• Certain fraud or concealment scenarios tied to when the claim accrues
• Other legally recognized barriers that prevent timely filing

2) Wrong statute selected (a practical risk)

If the true cause of action is better characterized under a different Nebraska statute, the SOL might not be 6 months. This is the most common “exception” in real-life case review: the timeline changes because the legal theory changes.

For instance, some claims involving fiduciary relationships may also implicate other legal labels (e.g., fraud, conversion, or contract-based theories). When that happens, a different SOL may apply than § 13-919—even when the underlying conduct looks similar.

3) Accrual date disputes

Even if § 13-919 is the right SOL statute, the accrual date may be contested. Parties often disagree about when the plaintiff knew (or should have known) of the breach-related injury, or when the statutory accrual point occurred.

This is where evidence matters:

• Communications and disclosures
• Financial records showing when harm was realized
• Dates of transfers, accounting, or repudiation
• Any written acknowledgments

4) Procedural timing

Filing “close to the deadline” can be risky due to delays in:

• Drafting pleadings and obtaining signatures
• Service on defendants
• Court administrative processing

A conservative approach is to calculate the SOL date and then build in buffer time to avoid last-minute timing errors.

Statute citation

The default SOL referenced in this guide is:

• Neb. Rev. Stat. § 13-919 — Nebraska general/default SOL period for covered actions (using the 6-month (0.5 years) baseline described for this jurisdiction).

Source: https://law.justia.com/codes/nebraska/chapter-13/statute-13-919/

Use the calculator

DocketMath’s Statute of Limitations calculator helps you turn dates into a deadline quickly, using the selected Nebraska SOL rule.

How to use it (inputs)

To generate a useful output, you’ll typically provide:

• Jurisdiction: US-NE (Nebraska)
• General SOL rule: Apply Neb. Rev. Stat. § 13-919 (default 0.5 years / 6 months)
• Accrual date: the date the claim is considered to have accrued under the statute for your situation

How outputs change

When you change a single input, the outcome can move materially:

• Change the accrual date by 1 month → the calculated deadline shifts by roughly 1 month (because the SOL period is fixed at 6 months).
• Use an earlier accrual date → the deadline becomes earlier (more conservative).
• Use a later accrual date → the deadline becomes later (potentially less conservative, depending on evidence).

For best results, consider calculating two versions:

• Earliest plausible accrual date
• Latest plausible accrual date

That range can help you decide how urgently to file.

Start here

Use the tool now: ** /tools/statute-of-limitations

Related reading

• Choosing the right statute of limitations tool for Vermont — Tool comparison
• Statute of limitations in Singapore: how to estimate the deadline — How-to guide
• Choosing the right statute of limitations tool for Connecticut — Tool comparison