Mock v. Neumeister, 296 Neb. 376

In June 2011 Carl Landgraf (aged ~87) executed joint-tenancy deeds conveying ~1,000 acres to Gail and Marlene Neumeister, and a revocable trust and powers of attorney naming Gail; total recited consideration was $4.
After Landgraf’s death, Clarence Mock (special administrator) sued to set aside the inter vivos deeds for undue influence; the Neumeisters counterclaimed for improvements (later held moot).
Trial lasted 8 days with 33 witnesses and 200+ exhibits; evidence showed a long, close relationship between Landgraf and Gail (Gail had assisted and farmed Landgraf’s land for years).
Evidence also showed signs of Landgraf’s cognitive decline (professional review opined mild–moderate impaired executive function), mixed witness impressions about dependency and fear of Gail, and prior estate planning that contemplated gifts to farmers and charities.
The district court found a confidential relationship existed but concluded Mock did not prove undue influence by clear and convincing evidence; it taxed some costs but declined to tax deposition costs.
The Nebraska Supreme Court reviewed de novo (equitable action), gave weight to trial-court credibility findings, and affirmed the district court in all respects.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Mock)	Defendant's Argument (Neumeister)	Held
Whether the 2011 deeds were product of undue influence	Deeds resulted from Gail’s undue influence over vulnerable Landgraf (confidential relationship + suspicious circumstances justify inference)	Conveyances reflected Landgraf’s autonomous wishes to give land to his farmers; no clear convincing proof of unlawful control	Court affirmed: Mock failed to prove undue influence by clear and convincing evidence
Effect of burden-shifting / "presumption" or inference of undue influence	Court should apply the inference framework from prior probate cases to inter vivos conveyances to shift burden	Defendants argued Clinger eliminated a true presumption and evidence did not meet the required standard	Court declined to change the substantive burden: ultimate burden remains with contestant; inference language is descriptive but did not alter result
Validity of counterclaim for improvements (Neumeisters)	Mock sought dismissal if deeds set aside	Neumeisters sought recovery for improvements if deeds set aside	Court held counterclaim moot because deeds not set aside; no further relief granted
Whether deposition costs must be taxed to Mock	Mock should pay deposition costs as part of costs assessed to unsuccessful party	§25-1711 gives court equitable discretion; district court properly declined to tax deposition costs to Mock	Court affirmed: denial of deposition-cost taxation was not an abuse of discretion

In re Estate of Clinger, 292 Neb. 237 (discussing inference language and rejecting use of "presumption" in jury instructions)
In re Estate of Hedke, 278 Neb. 727 (noting undue influence often proved by inference from circumstances)
Goff v. Weeks, 246 Neb. 163 (equitable undue-influence principles)
Martensen v. Rejda Bros., 283 Neb. 279 (standard of review for taxing costs)
Caruso v. Parkos, 262 Neb. 961 (definition of undue influence invalidating conveyances)