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

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (2026)

Forms

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

(a) A contract of deposit that contains provisions in substantially the form provided in this subsection establishes the type of account provided, and the account is governed by the provisions of sections 30-2716 to 30-2733 applicable to an account of that type.

UNIFORM SINGLE- OR MULTIPLE-PARTY ACCOUNT FORM

PARTIES (Name One Or More Parties): .................

OWNERSHIP (Select One And Initial):

.....SINGLE-PARTY ACCOUNT

.....MULTIPLE-PARTY ACCOUNT

Parties own account in proportion to net contributions unless there is clear and convincing evidence of a different intent.

RIGHTS AT DEATH (Select One And Initial):

.....SINGLE-PARTY ACCOUNT

At death of party, ownership passes as part of party's estate.

.....SINGLE-PARTY ACCOUNT WITH POD (PAY ON DEATH) DESIGNATION

(Name One Or More Beneficiaries): ......................

At death of party, ownership passes to POD beneficiaries and is not part of party's estate.

.....MULTIPLE-PARTY ACCOUNT WITH RIGHT OF SURVIVORSHIP

At death of party, ownership passes to surviving parties.

.....MULTIPLE-PARTY ACCOUNT WITH RIGHT OF SURVIVORSHIP AND POD (PAY ON DEATH) DESIGNATION (Name One Or More Beneficiaries): ........................................

At death of last surviving party, ownership passes to POD beneficiaries and is not part of last surviving party's estate.

.....MULTIPLE-PARTY ACCOUNT WITHOUT RIGHT OF SURVIVORSHIP

At death of party, deceased party's ownership passes as part of deceased party's estate.

AGENCY (POWER OF ATTORNEY) DESIGNATION (Optional)

Agents may make account transactions for parties but have no ownership or rights at death unless named as POD beneficiaries. (To Add Agency Designation To Account, Name One Or More Agents): ...........................................................

(Select One And Initial):

.....AGENCY DESIGNATION SURVIVES DISABILITY OR INCAPACITY OF PARTIES

.....AGENCY DESIGNATION TERMINATES ON DISABILITY OR INCAPACITY OF PARTIES

(b) A contract of deposit that does not contain provisions in substantially the form provided in subsection (a) of this section is governed by the provisions of sections 30-2716 to 30-2733 applicable to the type of account that most nearly conforms to the depositor's intent.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2007–2023 · leading case: Eggleston v. Kovacich, 742 N.W.2d 471 (Neb. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Eggleston v. Kovacich, 742 N.W.2d 471 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 26× “In the present case, we conclude that because the contract of deposit for account 547-745 contained provisions substantially in the form provided in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 1995), the court should have determined from the face of the contract of deposit that…”
In re Est. of Balvin, 888 N.W.2d 499 (Neb. 2016). · cites it 7× “The parties stipulated that this agreement form conforms to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 2016).”
Irwin v. West Gate Bank, 288 Neb. 353 (Neb. 2014). “§ 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 2008) provides that a contract of deposit establishes the type of account if the contract contains provisions in substantially the form pro- vided by that subsection.”
Stefan v. Lewis (Neb. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 17× “Consideration of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (Reissue 2008) becomes relevant to our analysis.”
In re Est. of Greb (Neb. 2014). · cites it 14× “[5] Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 2008) provides that a contract of deposit establishes the type of account if the contract contains provisions in substantially the form provided by that subsection.”
In re Est. of Ackerman (Neb. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 6× “ANALYSIS Underwood assigns that the documents that compose the contract of deposit contain provisions in substantially the form provided in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 2016) and are therefore governed by the provisions of Neb.”
In re Est. of Howard (Neb. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 6× “All such personal bank accounts are subject to statutes governing nonprobate transfers of accounts, and only if a contract of deposit does not conform to the statutory forms provided in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 2016), can evidence be presented on the issue of the…”
In re Est. of Fulton (D.C. 2023). “2 My focus is on clarity of options or decision-making specifically with regard to whether or not a joint account has rights of survivorship, but the one other state high court that has examined its analogous provision of its UNTDA, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a), in any detail,…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719(a) — 6 cases
Eggleston v. Kovacich, 742 N.W.2d 471 (Neb. 2007). “In the present case, we conclude that because the contract of deposit for account 547-745 contained provisions substantially in the form provided in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 1995), the court should have determined from the face of the contract of deposit that…”
In re Est. of Balvin, 888 N.W.2d 499 (Neb. 2016). “The parties stipulated that this agreement form conforms to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 2016).”
In re Est. of Greb (Neb. 2014). “[5] Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 2008) provides that a contract of deposit establishes the type of account if the contract contains provisions in substantially the form provided by that subsection.”
In re Est. of Howard (Neb. Ct. App. 2017). “All such personal bank accounts are subject to statutes governing nonprobate transfers of accounts, and only if a contract of deposit does not conform to the statutory forms provided in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 2016), can evidence be presented on the issue of the…”
In re Est. of Ackerman (Neb. Ct. App. 2017). “ANALYSIS Underwood assigns that the documents that compose the contract of deposit contain provisions in substantially the form provided in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 2016) and are therefore governed by the provisions of Neb.”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719(b) — 4 cases
Eggleston v. Kovacich, 742 N.W.2d 471 (Neb. 2007). “In the present case, we conclude that because the contract of deposit for account 547-745 contained provisions substantially in the form provided in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 1995), the court should have determined from the face of the contract of deposit that…”
In re Est. of Greb (Neb. 2014). “[5] Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 2008) provides that a contract of deposit establishes the type of account if the contract contains provisions in substantially the form provided by that subsection.”
Stefan v. Lewis (Neb. Ct. App. 2013). “Consideration of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (Reissue 2008) becomes relevant to our analysis.”
In re Est. of Ackerman (Neb. Ct. App. 2017). “ANALYSIS Underwood assigns that the documents that compose the contract of deposit contain provisions in substantially the form provided in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2719 (a) (Reissue 2016) and are therefore governed by the provisions of Neb.”
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.