Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 40
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 40-104 (2026)

Homestead; how conveyed or encumbered; assertion of claim of invalidity of conveyance

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

Except as otherwise provided in this section, the homestead of a married person cannot be conveyed or encumbered unless the instrument by which it is conveyed or encumbered is executed and acknowledged by both spouses. The interest of either or both spouses may be conveyed or encumbered by a conservator acting in accordance with the provisions of the Nebraska Probate Code and may also be conveyed or encumbered by an attorney in fact appointed by and acting on behalf of either spouse under any power of attorney which grants the power to sell and convey real property. Any claim of invalidity of a deed of conveyance of homestead property because of failure to comply with the provisions of this section must be asserted within the time provided in sections 76-288 to 76-298.

A purchase agreement or contract for sale of homestead property signed by both spouses does not require acknowledgment to be enforceable.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 37 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1930–2024 · leading case: Jordan v. LSF8 Master Participation Trust, 300 Neb. 523 (Neb. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Jordan v. LSF8 Master Participation Trust, 300 Neb. 523 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 11× “NATURE OF CASE The plaintiff appeals from an order of summary judgment in a quiet title action seeking to invalidate a mortgage lien on the ground that it was an improper encumbrance of the homestead under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 40-104 (Reissue 2016), because his signatures on the…”
Chambers v. Bringenberg, 309 Neb. 888 (Neb. 2021). · cites it 43× “Transfer-on-death deeds are not subject to the requirements of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 40-104 (Reissue 2016). 7.”
Landon v. Pettijohn, 438 N.W.2d 757 (Neb. 1989). · cites it 17× “Appellees moved the court for summary judgment on the basis that the executed agreement was subject *839 to the homestead act, specifically Neb. Rev. Stat. § 40-104 (Reissue 1988), and therefore was void and unenforceable because the appellees’ signatures were not acknowledged…”
McIntosh v. Borchers, 241 N.W.2d 534 (Neb. 1976). · cites it 8× “” Section 40-104, R. R. S. 1943, provides: “The homestead of a married person cannot be conveyed or encumbered unless the instrument by which it is conveyed or encumbered is executed and acknowledged by both husband and wife * * This court has consistently held that the statute…”
Christensen v. Arant, 358 N.W.2d 200 (Neb. 1984). · cites it 6× “Neb.Rev.Stat. § 40-104 (Reissue 1978) provides in relevant part: "The homestead of a married person cannot be conveyed or encumbered unless the instrument by which it is conveyed or encumbered is executed and acknowledged by both husband and wife .”
AVG Partners I v. Genesis Health Clubs, 307 Neb. 47 (Neb. 2020). · cites it 2× “- 86 - Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 307 Nebraska Reports AVG PARTNERS I v. GENESIS HEALTH CLUBS Cite as 307 Neb.”
Simons v. Simons, 978 N.W.2d 121 (Neb. 2022). · cites it 2× “§ 30-2314 (c),” a “waiver as to homestead rights pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 40-104 ,” and a “waiver of spousal rights to qualified retire- ment plan benefits.”
Struempler v. Peterson, 206 N.W.2d 629 (Neb. 1973). · cites it 10× “Section 40-104, R. R. S. 1943, provides in part: “The homestead of a married person cannot be conveyed or encumbered unless the instrument by which it is conveyed or encumbered is executed and acknowledged by both husband and wife, except as otherwise hereinafter provided.”
Trowbridge v. Bisson, 44 N.W.2d 810 (Neb. 1950). · cites it 4× “The primary and controlling issue is whether or not the alleged contract to sell the homestead was void and unenforceable because not acknowledged by both husband and wife, as required by section 40-104, R. S. Supp., 1949. We conclude that it was so void and unenforceable.”
Bock v. Bank of Bellevue, 434 N.W.2d 310 (Neb. 1989). · cites it 3× “"§ 40-104 (Reissue 1988) does riot require that a guaranty ,be acknowledged; (2) that the guaranty and deeds of trust were supported by sufficient consideration; (3) that the bank did not have a duty to disclose the son’s financial situation to the Bocks and that the bank did…”
Mut. of Omaha Bank v. Watson, 297 Neb. 479 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 5× “However, this court has long held that “‘[a] deed to real estate, executed and delivered, is valid between the parties, though not lawfully acknowledged nor witnessed, and is suf- ficient to convey the land described therein, with the exception of the homestead of the grantor.”
McIntosh v. Borchers, 266 N.W.2d 200 (Neb. 1978). · cites it 2× “Plaintiffs, being husband and wife, attempted to purchase an 160-acre farm which was the homestead of the defendants who were also husband and wife.”
Show all 37 citing cases →
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.