In re Estate of Ackerman
A-15-977
| Neb. Ct. App. | Mar 14, 2017Background
- Elsie R. Ackerman opened a checking account in 1955; a 1977 signature card named Judith Bolejack as POD (payable-on-death) beneficiary.
- In 1986 Ackerman signed bank cards that removed "access" for Bolejack and granted "access" to Ernest Siems; the bank filed both cards the same day.
- In 1994 a card (unsigned by Ackerman) removed Siems’ access and another (allegedly signed by Ackerman at Bolejack’s request) granted Bolejack access again.
- Ackerman died in 2013 with the account holding $208,719.80; the bank notified Bolejack she owned the funds as POD beneficiary.
- Underwood (Ackerman’s other daughter) sued, alleging conversion and that the account should be estate property; the county court found Ackerman did not intend to revoke the POD and awarded the account to Bolejack.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Underwood) | Defendant's Argument (Bolejack) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ackerman revoked Bolejack’s POD designation in 1986 | The 1986 "remove access" card shows intent to revoke POD so funds belong to estate | The 1986 cards merely appointed/removed an authorized signer/agent; no intent to change POD | Court affirmed county court: no clear evidence Ackerman intended to remove POD; POD remained effective |
| Whether Bolejack converted funds after death | Funds taken from account were estate property and thus converted by Bolejack | Funds were nonprobate POD property belonging to Bolejack on death | Not reached (disposition on first issue dispositive) |
| Whether funds are held in resulting or constructive trust by Bolejack | Account should be treated as estate asset and subject to estate administration/trust remedies | POD designation gives Bolejack sole ownership at death; no trust imposed | Not reached (disposition on first issue dispositive) |
| Whether bank forms complied with statutory sample form so extrinsic evidence may be used | The documents substantially comply or, if not, extrinsic evidence shows intent to include account in estate | Forms did not comply fully; statutes permit looking to the account type that matches depositor’s intent | Court: signature card lacked later statutory elements, so analysis used depositor intent; but factual findings showed no intent to revoke POD |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Estate of Greb, 288 Neb. 362 (use of extrinsic evidence when signature card fails statutory form)
- In re Trust of Rosenberg, 273 Neb. 59 (POD survivorship cannot be altered by will)
- D.I. v. Gibson, 291 Neb. 554 (courts need not decide unnecessary issues)
- Cain v. Custer Cty. Bd. of Equal., 291 Neb. 730 (errors must be specifically assigned and argued)