One of the most fundamental properties of a proof system is analyticity, expressing the fact that a proof of a given formula F only uses subformulas of F. In sequent calculus, this property is usually proved by showing that the $\mathsf{cut}$ rule is admissible, i.e., the introduction of the auxiliary lemma H in the reasoning “if H follows from G and F follows from H, then F follows from G” can be eliminated. The proof of cut admissibility is usually a tedious, error-prone process through several proof transformations, thus requiring the assistance of (semi-)automatic procedures. In a previous work by Miller and Pimentel, linear logic ( $\mathsf{LL}$ ) was used as a logical framework for establishing sufficient conditions for cut admissibility of object logical systems (OL). The OL’s inference rules are specified as an $\mathsf{LL}$ theory and an easy-to-verify criterion sufficed to establish the cut-admissibility theorem for the OL at hand. However, there are many logical systems that cannot be adequately encoded in $\mathsf{LL}$ , the most symptomatic cases being sequent systems for modal logics. In this paper, we use a linear-nested sequent ( $\mathsf{LNS}$ ) presentation of $\mathsf{MMLL}$ (a variant of LL with subexponentials), and show that it is possible to establish a cut-admissibility criterion for $\mathsf{LNS}$ systems for (classical or substructural) multimodal logics. We show that the same approach is suitable for handling the $\mathsf{LNS}$ system for intuitionistic logic.