(UTC 603) (a) To the extent a trust is revocable by a settlor, a trustee may follow a direction of the settlor that is contrary to the terms of the trust. To the extent a trust is revocable by a settlor in conjunction with a person other than a trustee or person holding an adverse interest, the trustee may follow a direction from the settlor and the other person holding the power to revoke even if the direction is contrary to the terms of the trust.
(b) While a trust is revocable, rights of the beneficiaries are subject to the control of, and the duties of the trustee are owed exclusively to, the settlor.
(c) While the trust is irrevocable and during the period the power may be exercised, the holder of a power of withdrawal has the rights of a settlor of a revocable trust under this section and the duties of the trustee are owed exclusively to the holder of the power to the extent of the property subject to the power.
(d) While the trust is irrevocable and during the period the interest of any beneficiary not having a present interest may be terminated by the exercise of a power of appointment or other power, the duties of the trustee are owed exclusively to the holder of the power to the extent of the property subject to the power.
Notes of Decisions
In re Conservatorship of Abbott, 890 N.W.2d 469 (Neb. 2017).
· cites it 11× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-3855 (Reissue 2016) does not dictate who may petition for the removal of a trustee, but, rather, describes to whom fiduciary duties are owed.”
In re Trust of Cook, 947 N.W.2d 870 (Neb. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 8× “2019) suggests that the only real party in interest in a case involving a revocable trust would be the settlor of that trust, or perhaps one that represents the settlor’s interests.”
Litherland v. Jurgens, 869 N.W.2d 92 (Neb. 2015).
“] § 30-3855(a) [(Reissue 2008)] and § 774B of the Restatement.”
Manon v. Orr, 289 Neb. 484 (2014).
· cites it 18× “In dismissing, the court reasoned that under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-3855 (a) (Reissue 2008), the duties of the trustee to the trust are owed to Virginia as the still-living settlor of the trust, and that the rights of the beneficiaries are subject to Virginia’s control.”
In re Trust of Bresel, No. A-14-922 (Neb. Ct. App. Apr. 5, 2016).
· cites it 3× “Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-3855 (a) (Cum. Supp.”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-3855(a): 7 cases
In re Conservatorship of Abbott, 890 N.W.2d 469 (Neb. 2017).
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-3855 (Reissue 2016) does not dictate who may petition for the removal of a trustee, but, rather, describes to whom fiduciary duties are owed.”
Litherland v. Jurgens, 869 N.W.2d 92 (Neb. 2015).
“] § 30-3855(a) [(Reissue 2008)] and § 774B of the Restatement.”
Manon v. Orr, 289 Neb. 484 (2014).
“In dismissing, the court reasoned that under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-3855 (a) (Reissue 2008), the duties of the trustee to the trust are owed to Virginia as the still-living settlor of the trust, and that the rights of the beneficiaries are subject to Virginia’s control.”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-3855(b): 3 cases
In re Conservatorship of Abbott, 890 N.W.2d 469 (Neb. 2017).
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-3855 (Reissue 2016) does not dictate who may petition for the removal of a trustee, but, rather, describes to whom fiduciary duties are owed.”
In re Trust of Cook, 947 N.W.2d 870 (Neb. Ct. App. 2020).
“2019) suggests that the only real party in interest in a case involving a revocable trust would be the settlor of that trust, or perhaps one that represents the settlor’s interests.”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-3855(c): 2 cases
In re Conservatorship of Abbott, 890 N.W.2d 469 (Neb. 2017).
“Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-3855 (Reissue 2016) does not dictate who may petition for the removal of a trustee, but, rather, describes to whom fiduciary duties are owed.”
Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-3855(d): 1 case
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.