(a) In this section, net contribution of a party means the sum of all deposits to an account made by or for the party, less all payments from the account made to or for the party which have not been paid to or applied to the use of another party and a proportionate share of any charges deducted from the account, plus a proportionate share of any interest or dividends earned, whether or not included in the current balance. The term includes deposit life insurance proceeds added to the account by reason of death of the party whose net contribution is in question.
(b) During the lifetime of all parties, an account belongs to the parties in proportion to the net contribution of each to the sums on deposit, unless there is clear and convincing evidence of a different intent. As between parties married to each other, in the absence of proof otherwise, the net contribution of each is presumed to be an equal amount.
(c) A beneficiary in an account having a POD designation has no right to sums on deposit during the lifetime of any party.
(d) An agent in an account with an agency designation has no beneficial right to sums on deposit.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
10
cases, 1994–2016 · leading case:
Crosby v. Luehrs, 669 N.W.2d 635 (Neb. 2003).
Crosby v. Luehrs, 669 N.W.2d 635 (Neb. 2003).
· cites it 3× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2722 (c) (Reissue 1995).”
In re Est. of Balvin, 888 N.W.2d 499 (Neb. 2016).
· cites it 3× “The contributions to a joint account are controlled by Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2722 (Reissue 2016), which provides: (a) In this section, net contribution of a party means the sum of all deposits to an account made by or for the party, less all payments from the account made to or…”
Newman v. Thomas, 652 N.W.2d 565 (Neb. 2002).
· cites it 2× “are not affected by death of a party, but the amount to which the decedent, immediately before death, was beneficially entitled under section 30-2722 is transferred as part of the decedent’s estate.”
In re Est. of Lorenz, 292 Neb. 543 (Neb. 2016).
· cites it 2× “(b) A surviving party or beneficiary who receives payment from an account after death of a party is liable to account to the personal representative of the dece- dent for a proportionate share of the amount received to which the decedent, immediately before death, was…”
LaBenz v. LaBenz, 575 N.W.2d 161 (Neb. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 12× “§ 30-2722 (b) (Reissue 1995) provides in part: “During the lifetime of all parties, an account belongs to the parties in proportion to the net contribution of each to the sums on deposit, unless there is clear and convincing evidence of a different intent.”
Renter v. Siedenburg, 739 N.W.2d 216 (Neb. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 15× “The trial court found that the net contribution rule set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2722 (Reissue 1995) is not applicable to the annuity contract, as Renter had claimed, and that the parties’ rights and obligations are governed by the provisions contained in the annuity…”
In re Overton, 169 B.R. 196 (Bankr. D. Neb. 1994).
· cites it 6× “See Neb.Rev.Stat. §§ 30-2722 to 30-2726, 30-2727 to 30-2733 (West Supp.”
Linehan v. First Nat. Bank of Gordon, 579 N.W.2d 157 (Neb. Ct. App. 1998).
“In particular, see §§ 30-2722 to 30-2726. Joint account is defined as an “account payable on request to one or more of two or more parties whether or not any mention is made of any right of survivorship ” § 30-2701(4).”
In re Est. of Lorenz (Neb. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “(b) A surviving party or beneficiary who receives payment from an account after death of a party is liable to account to the personal representative of the dece- dent for a proportionate share of the amount received to which the decedent, immediately before death, was…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2722(b) — 3 cases
LaBenz v. LaBenz, 575 N.W.2d 161 (Neb. Ct. App. 1998).
“§ 30-2722 (b) (Reissue 1995) provides in part: “During the lifetime of all parties, an account belongs to the parties in proportion to the net contribution of each to the sums on deposit, unless there is clear and convincing evidence of a different intent.”
Renter v. Siedenburg, 739 N.W.2d 216 (Neb. Ct. App. 2007).
“The trial court found that the net contribution rule set forth in Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-2722 (Reissue 1995) is not applicable to the annuity contract, as Renter had claimed, and that the parties’ rights and obligations are governed by the provisions contained in the annuity…”
In re Overton, 169 B.R. 196 (Bankr. D. Neb. 1994).
“See Neb.Rev.Stat. §§ 30-2722 to 30-2726, 30-2727 to 30-2733 (West Supp.”
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.