Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365

Section 42-365 authorizes equitable division of the marital estate; a premarital business interest and the personal loans associated with it were excluded from the marital estate.

Meier v. Meier · filed 2024-07-02

Guided by Parde v. Parde, supra, we conclude that the district court abused its discretion by classifying as marital Steven’s 25-percent business interest and the $39,350 in personal loans associated with that business interest. ... Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365 (Reissue 2016) authorizes a trial court to equitably distribute the marital estate according to what is fair and reasonable under the circumstances.

Section 42-365 authorizes a fair and reasonable division of marital property, including a home valuation that supports an equitable equalization payment.

Casement v. Casement · filed 2024-08-27

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365 (Reissue 2016) authorizes a trial court to equitably distribute the marital estate according to what is fair and reasonable under the circumstances. ... And because the court did not separately provide a calculation associated with Michael’s equalization payment, we remand the matter to the district court to recalculate that payment while using a $437,500 valuation rather than the 2021 assessment which more fairly reflects the valuation as of the time of trial.

Section 42-365 requires a reasonable division of marital assets in light of the parties’ circumstances, including when a court orders assets sold.

White v. White · filed 2025-10-31

Such action, of course, must be within the statutory dictate that the division of the assets be reasonable, having regard for the circumstances of the parties as provided in § 42-365, and that it satisfy the ultimate test of fairness and reasonableness articulated by case law.

Section 42-365 requires evidence of marital contributions to a property's equity before a court can calculate a marital interest in it.

Prososki v. Regan · filed 2026-03-20

It would be mere speculation to calculate any marital interest in Jason’s duplex without evidence of amounts that the marital versus nonmarital funds contributed to its equity.

Section 42-365 permits equitable division of the marital estate; a home gifted to one spouse and its passive appreciation are excluded from that estate.

Gaudreault v. Gaudreault · filed 2023-06-06

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365 (Reissue 2016) authorizes a trial court to equitably distribute the marital estate according to what is fair and reasonable under the circumstances. ... Based on the record before us, we conclude that the district court properly found that the family home was a gift and thus, a nonmarital asset. ... Thus the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that Darlene had established that the appreciation in the home’s value was not due to the active efforts of either party, and in awarding the home solely to Darlene.

Section 42-365 requires courts to set aside traceable nonmarital property before equitably dividing the marital estate.

Novotny v. Novotny · filed 2023-08-15

Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365 (Reissue 2016), the equi- table division of property is a three-step process. ... Because at least $75,000 of the Jones Bank savings account could be traced to Timothy’s premarital funds, that amount should have been set aside as a nonmarital asset, and the district court abused its discretion when it failed to do so.

Under § 42-365, a spouse claiming a nonmarital interest must trace it; inherited funds that become inextricably mixed with marital property may be included in the marital estate.

Foster v. Foster · filed 2023-10-31

Kathleen has failed to carry her burden of proof to trace any premarital contributions to the improvements of Yutan Road. The district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Kathleen’s premarital funds had been comingled and including Yutan Road’s appreciation in the marital estate.

Section 42-365 requires courts to classify property as marital or nonmarital and set aside property brought into the marriage before dividing the marital estate.

Ilg v. Ilg · filed 2023-12-26

Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365 (Reissue 2016), the equitable division of property is a three-step process. Parde v. Parde, supra. The first step is to classify the parties’ property as marital or nonmarital, setting aside the nonmarital property to the party who brought that property to the marriage. ... We find that this account is nonmarital and is awarded solely to Dustin.

A spouse seeking a nonmarital property credit must trace the claimed funds into the marital asset being divided.

Dibuono-Gonzalez v. Gonzalez · filed 2024-05-21

Here, the district court abused its discretion by crediting Christina with the proceeds from the Madison house sale because Christina did not meet her burden in tracing the funds.

Section 42-365 places the burden on a spouse claiming property is nonmarital to prove that it should be excluded from the marital estate.

Backhaus v. Backhaus · filed 2024-10-29

Given that it was David’s burden to prove the existence of nonmarital property, we conclude that the district court abused its discretion in setting aside the FNBO x4020 savings account as David’s separate property.

Section 42-365’s property division framework requires a proven nonmarital contribution to be set aside before the marital estate is divided.

Patach v. Patach · filed 2026-01-27

However, in light of our conclusion that Colin should have had $80,000 of the Grebe Street equity set off to him because of his nonmarital down payment, we must recalculate the allocation of the assets and liabilities between the parties. If we first set off Colin’s $80,000 of nonmarital equity in the Grebe Street residence, that leaves only $20,172 of marital equity in that property.

Section 42-365 treats appreciation on home equity acquired through marital mortgage payments as marital property subject to equitable division.

Avery v. Whittle · filed 2026-03-17

As mentioned previously, under the source of funds rule, this created a marital interest in any appreciation on equity in the Castelar home, whether passive or active, to the extent that its equity increased due to mari- tal funds being used to pay down the mortgage.

Section 42-365 includes an increase in separate property’s value in the marital estate when marital funds or efforts caused the increase.

McReynolds v. McReynolds · filed 2025-07-08

However, any increase in value in Green Quest that occurred during the marriage would be included in the marital estate, unless Samuel could prove the increase was due to passive appreciation.

Section 42-365 requires an identifiable, traceable premarital down payment to be set aside when dividing the marital estate.

Cerra v. Cerra · filed 2025-10-14

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365 (Reissue 2016) authorizes a trial court to equitably distribute the marital estate according to what is fair and reasonable under the circumstances. ... Because the down payment was identifiable and traceable, the district court abused its discretion when it did not set off that amount as Robert’s premarital asset.

Under § 42-365, the party seeking to share in an asset’s appreciation bears the burden of proving that the asset appreciated.

Jeffers v. Jeffers · filed 2026-04-14

Just as the burden of proving the existence of a debt is on the party who seeks to divide it, we hold that the burden of proving an asset has appreciated is on the party seeking to share in it.

Section 42-365 permits different valuation dates for marital assets when each date is rationally related to the property being divided.

Rohde v. Rohde · filed 2019-05-10

We decline to mandate that a trial court must use only one valuation date in equitably dividing a marital estate. The date for valuation must be rationally related to the property being divided.

Section 42-365 permits a trial-date valuation of the marital estate when that date is rationally related to the property being divided, including postseparation earnings made possible in part by the other spouse’s child care.

Seivert v. Alli · filed 2021-05-21

In a divorce action, “[t]he purpose of a property division is to distribute the marital assets equitably between the parties.” Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365 (Reissue 2016). ... As a general principle, the date upon which a marital estate is valued should be rationally related to the property composing the marital estate. ... During this time, however, the evidence shows that Seivert was providing almost exclusive care for the parties’ minor children and, thus, to at least some extent, made Alli’s earnings possible. The val­uation date applied by the district court was rationally related to the property composing the marital estate, and we thus find no abuse of discretion.

Section 42-365 requires courts to value marital assets and liabilities when dividing property equitably, using a valuation date rationally related to the property divided.

Ullerich v. Ullerich · filed 2024-04-30

Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365 (Reissue 2016), the equitable division of property is a three-step process. ... We conclude that the court’s adoption of the late 2022 bank account valuations was consistent and rationally related to the property being divided.

Section 42-365 calls for an equitable division of marital property; the court may exclude later, separate tax debts and refunds when the chosen valuation date is rationally related to the estate.

Trent v. Trent · filed 2025-12-16

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 42-365 (Reissue 2016) provides for the division of property as may be reasonable, having regard for the circumstances of the parties, duration of the marriage, and a history of the contributions to the marriage by each party, and, further, § 42-365 provides that the purpose of a property division is to distribute the marital assets equitably between the parties. ... The district court used March 25, 2022, the date the dissolution complaint was filed, as the valuation date for purposes of the property division of the marital estate. This date was rationally related to the property composing the marital estate and the property being divided. ... We conclude the district court equitably divided the marital estate and it did not err in failing to include Kenneth’s 2023 tax return debt and Liza’s 2023 tax return proceeds in the marital estate.

Under § 42-365, marital funds used to pay down the principal on separate property create a proportionate marital interest that includes appreciation on that interest.

Stava v. Stava · filed 2024-11-15

Equitable property division under § 42-365 is a three-step process. ... In sum, because the portion of the property’s equity created during the marriage with marital funds constitutes marital property, the appreciation on that equity, whether it be passive or active, is also marital property. ... We hereby expressly adopt the source of funds rule.