This investigation examined the ability of the Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery (LNNB) to lateralize brain damage, since substantial statistical and methodological issues have been raised regarding the initial LNNB lateralization validation study. A comparison was then made of the ability of the LNNB and the Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery to lateralize brain damage. Both neuropsychological batteries were administered to 30 predominantly left- or right-hemisphere-damaged subjects (15 in each group) with discriminant analysis classification procedures demonstrating similar, above chance, accuracy in lateralizing cerebral dysfunction. Cross-validation of objective clinical rules designed to aid in LNNB test interpretation resulted in classification of brain damage and lateralization at levels below reported values from the test developer's laboratory. The limited role such simplistic rules have in assessment is discussed, as is the need to evaluate dimensions of test usefulness other than those related to gross diagnostic decisions (e.g., presence or laterality of brain damage) in determining the instrument of choice for clinical neuropsychological practice. More research is recommended to fully define the limits of the clinical utility of the LNNB.