Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 30
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2408 (2026)

Probate, testacy, and appointment proceedings; ultimate time limit

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

No informal probate or appointment proceeding or formal testacy or appointment proceeding, other than a proceeding to probate a will previously probated at the testator's domicile and appointment proceedings relating to an estate in which there has been a prior appointment, may be commenced more than three years after the decedent's death, except (1) if a previous proceeding was dismissed because of doubt about the fact of the decedent's death, appropriate probate, appointment, or testacy proceedings may be maintained at any time thereafter upon a finding that the decedent's death occurred prior to the initiation of the previous proceeding and the applicant or petitioner has not delayed unduly in initiating the subsequent proceeding; (2) appropriate probate, appointment, or testacy proceedings may be maintained in relation to the estate of an absent, disappeared, or missing person for whose estate a conservator has been appointed, at any time within three years after the conservator becomes able to establish the death of the protected person; (3) a proceeding to contest an informally probated will and to secure appointment of the person with legal priority for appointment in the event the contest is successful may be commenced within the later of twelve months from the informal probate or three years from the decedent's death; and (4) an informal probate or appointment or a formal testacy or appointment proceeding may be commenced thereafter if no formal or informal proceeding for probate or proceeding concerning the succession or administration has occurred within the three-year period, but claims other than expenses of administration may not be presented against the estate. These limitations do not apply to proceedings to construe probated wills or determine heirs of an intestate. In cases under (1) or (2) above, the date on which a testacy or appointment proceeding is properly commenced shall be deemed to be the date of the decedent's death for purposes of other limitations provisions of this code which relate to the date of death.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1983–2022 · leading case: In re Est. of Fuchs, 297 Neb. 667 (Neb. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re Est. of Fuchs, 297 Neb. 667 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 20× “The district court granted summary judgment to Gilbert’s other two children, who had objected to probating the will, and dismissed the amended petition under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2408 (Reissue 2016) as time barred.”
In Re Est. of Nemetz, 735 N.W.2d 363 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 7× “*920 § 30-2408 (Reissue 1995) to determining only how Edward’s property devolved at his death and (2) in denying their request to remove Kathleen as the personal representative for the estate.”
In re Est. of Severson, 310 Neb. 982 (Neb. 2022). · cites it 4× “” Kelly objected to the application for informal appointment of a personal representative and asked the court to dismiss it.”
In Re Est. of Flicker, 339 N.W.2d 914 (Neb. 1983). · cites it 2× “A line must be drawn, and we believe that it is unreasonable to follow the alternative of permitting witnesses to sign a will at any time after the testator’s death and prior to the 3-year statute of limitations for probate or testacy proceedings in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2408…”
In re Est. of Severson, 310 Neb. 982 (Neb. 2022). · cites it 4× “” Kelly objected to the application for informal appointment of a personal representative and asked the court to dismiss it.”
Matter of Est. of Peters, 509 A.2d 797 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1986). “A line must be drawn, and we believe that it is unreasonable to follow the alternative of permitting witnesses to sign a will at any time after the testator's death and prior to the 3-year statute of limitations for probate or testacy proceedings in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2408…”
Hilgert v. Hilgert (D. Neb. 2020). · cites it 2× “Thus, “[b]ecause a challenge to a previously probated will is cognizable only in a Nebraska probate court,” a federal district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over “a proceeding that essentially amounts to a continuation of the earlier probate proceeding.”
Christopher Sianis v. Mary S. Jensen (8th Cir. 2002). “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2408 ; Dunmire v. Cool, 237 N.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.