Provide for removal from a rental agreement of a cotenant or occupant who has committed domestic violence, require landlords to change locks, and provide landlords with related powers and duties
LB267 would amend Nebraska’s Uniform Residential Landlord and Tenant Act to create a process for addressing domestic violence in shared rental housing. The bill allows a tenant or household member who has been the victim of domestic violence by a cotenant or other occupant of the same dwelling unit to request removal of the perpetrator from the rental agreement and, if necessary, exclusion from the premises. To use this process, the tenant must provide the landlord with documentation such as a protective order, restraining order, or similar relief, along with written notice identifying the perpetrator, the requested termination date, and a preferred method for future communication.
The bill also creates a separate procedure when the perpetrator is not a cotenant or occupant of the same unit. In that situation, the tenant may require the landlord to change the locks if the tenant has the required domestic violence documentation and written request. The landlord must change the locks within 24 hours, either by replacing the locking mechanism or rekeying/resetting access codes for keyless locks. If the landlord does not act, the tenant may change the locks in a workmanlike manner and must then provide the landlord access information. The bill further authorizes landlords to recover court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees from a perpetrator in successful eviction-related litigation, permits landlords to retain a copy of the key or entry code to a new lock, and allows landlords to charge the tenant the actual and reasonable cost of the lock change. It also repeals the original section being replaced.
The bill’s impact on state law would be to add explicit tenant protections and landlord duties in domestic violence situations, while narrowing the landlord’s actions to the perpetrator rather than the entire household in cotenant cases. It would change the landlord-tenant framework by creating a statutory right to remove an abusive cotenant, requiring rapid lock changes, and clarifying that landlords acting in good faith under the section are not liable. It would also affect eviction practice, access control, and cost allocation between tenants, landlords, and perpetrators.
The general sentiment reflected by the bill’s design is protective of domestic violence survivors and aimed at giving tenants practical tools to secure housing and safety without being forced to leave. Because no committee transcript or vote record is provided, there is no documented floor or committee debate in the supplied materials. The bill’s final status as indefinitely postponed suggests it did not advance, but the available record does not show the reasons for that outcome.
Notable points of contention likely center on the balance between survivor protections and landlord/tenant administration. Potential issues include the short 24-hour deadline for landlords to change locks, the evidentiary requirements for tenants to prove domestic violence, the landlord’s ability to retain a key or code, and the allocation of costs for lock changes. Another possible point of concern is the eviction/removal process for a cotenant perpetrator, which could raise questions about due process, lease enforcement, and the landlord’s role in disputes between occupants.
LB267 would amend the Nebraska Uniform Residential Landlord and Tenant Act to create new statutory procedures for domestic violence-related tenant protections. It would authorize removal of a perpetrating cotenant or occupant from a rental agreement, require landlords to change locks in certain domestic violence cases, allow tenants to change locks if landlords fail to act, permit landlords to recover costs and attorney’s fees from perpetrators in successful actions, and clarify landlord immunity for good-faith compliance. It would also repeal the prior section and replace it with a more detailed framework governing notice, documentation, access, and cost recovery.
The bill appears broadly supportive of domestic violence survivors by giving tenants a direct legal mechanism to separate from an abusive cotenant and secure their residence quickly. Because no committee transcript or vote record is included, there is no documented public debate in the provided materials, and the only available outcome is that the bill was indefinitely postponed. That status suggests the proposal did not gain enough support to advance, but the record supplied here does not identify specific supporters or opponents.
The main areas of likely contention are the landlord obligations and the procedural safeguards for all parties. Landlords may object to the 24-hour lock-change requirement, the need to act on tenant-provided documentation, and the possibility of being drawn into disputes between cotenants or occupants. Tenant advocates would likely focus on the need for quick safety measures, while others may question whether the bill’s documentation standards are sufficient to prevent misuse. The eviction/removal process for a perpetrating cotenant, the landlord’s right to keep a key or code, and the tenant’s responsibility for reasonable costs are also likely to be debated.