Burgardt v. Burgardt, 934 N.W.2d 488

Harlan and Shirley Burgardt married in 1992; marriage dissolved by district court in 2017. The disputed items were a portion of Harlan’s 401(k) allegedly accumulated before marriage and proceeds/credit from a 2006 inheritance used toward purchase of the family farm.
Harlan testified his 401(k) was worth $130,000 at the time of marriage and that he received a 25% share (~$60,000) from his father’s estate in 2006 which was applied toward purchasing the home farm.
Harlan moved pre-marital 401(k) funds into an IRA in 2010 and used IRA funds for various purchases; some assets (gold coins, equipment, farm purchases) were traceable to those funds.
The district court set off $130,000 to Harlan as nonmarital 401(k) funds and $60,000 as nonmarital inheritance; the decree otherwise split marital assets nearly equally.
The Nebraska Court of Appeals reversed parts of that ruling, holding Harlan failed to prove nonmarital status/value without documentary corroboration and ordered partial reallocation; Harlan sought further review.
The Nebraska Supreme Court granted review, held that documentary proof is not always required and that testimony may establish nonmarital property by the greater weight of the evidence, and reversed the Court of Appeals.

Issue	Harlan's Argument	Shirley's Argument	Held
Whether documentary evidence is required to prove property is nonmarital	Harlan: his credible testimony alone established premarital 401(k) and inheritance	Shirley/Ct. of Appeals: documentary records are necessary; testimony alone insufficient	Documentary evidence is not strictly required; credible testimony can establish nonmarital property if it carries greater weight
Whether the nonmarital value must be "definitively" proven	Harlan: value established by his testimony and lack of contradiction	Shirley/Ct. of Appeals: value must be proved conclusively/definitively by records	Value need only be proved by the greater weight of the evidence, not conclusively or definitively
Whether the district court abused its discretion in setting off $130k and $60k	Harlan: district court did not abuse its discretion in crediting his testimony and setting off amounts	Shirley/Ct. of Appeals: district court erred because of lack of documentary support	Court: no abuse of discretion; district court credibility findings stand on record

Brozek v. Brozek, 292 Neb. 681 (2016) (discusses tracing premarital assets and weighing testimony credibility)
Dooling v. Dooling, 303 Neb. 494 (2019) (standard: appellate review of domestic relations is de novo on the record to determine abuse of discretion)
Osantowski v. Osantowski, 298 Neb. 339 (2017) (trial court may set off premarital funds where values undisputed; corroboration may be unnecessary)
Rohde v. Rohde, 303 Neb. 85 (2019) (premarital retirement contributions are nonmarital)