Neb. Rev. Stat. § 30-3862 — NE Code / Chapter 30 / Section 30-3862
View Statute 30-3862
Status: in_force

(UTC 706) (a) The settlor, a cotrustee, or a beneficiary may request the court to remove a trustee, or a trustee may be removed by the court on its own initiative.

(b) The court may remove a trustee if:

(1) the trustee has committed a serious breach of trust;

(2) lack of cooperation among cotrustees substantially impairs the administration of the trust;

(3) because of unfitness, unwillingness, or persistent failure of the trustee to administer the trust effectively, the court determines that removal of the trustee best serves the interests of the beneficiaries; or

(4) there has been a substantial change of circumstances or removal is requested by all of the qualified beneficiaries, the court finds that removal of the trustee best serves the interests of all of the beneficiaries and is not inconsistent with a material purpose of the trust, and a suitable cotrustee or successor trustee is available.

(c) Pending a final decision on a request to remove a trustee, or in lieu of or in addition to removing a trustee, the court may order such appropriate relief under subsection (b) of section 30-3890 as may be necessary to protect the trust property or the interests of the beneficiaries.

Laws 2003, LB 130, § 62.

The petitioners qualified as beneficiaries under the Nebraska Uniform Trust Code, because a family trust granted them a contingent future beneficial interest. In re William R. Zutavern Revocable Trust, 309 Neb. 542, 961 N.W.2d 807 (2021).

The petitioners qualified as beneficiaries under the Nebraska Uniform Trust Code, because a family trust granted them a contingent future beneficial interest. In re William R. Zutavern Revocable Trust, 309 Neb. 542, 961 N.W.2d 807 (2021).

Removal of bank as trustee was inconsistent with material purpose of trust, where bank was selected because settlor wanted a trustee that was independent, and settlor did not want trustee that was a part of settlor's family. In re Trust Created by Fenske, 303 Neb. 430, 930 N.W.2d 43 (2019).

Removal of bank as trustee was inconsistent with material purpose of trust, where bank was selected because settlor wanted a trustee that was independent, and settlor did not want trustee that was a part of settlor's family. In re Trust Created by Fenske, 303 Neb. 430, 930 N.W.2d 43 (2019).

Where two trusts share the same beneficiaries, trustee, and trust instrument and removal of the trustee for breach of fiduciary duty was appropriate for one of the trusts, a county court has the power in equity to determine if it is in the best interests of the beneficiaries to remove the trustee of the second trust. In re Conservatorship of Abbott, 295 Neb. 510, 890 N.W.2d 469 (2017).

Where two trusts share the same beneficiaries, trustee, and trust instrument and removal of the trustee for breach of fiduciary duty was appropriate for one of the trusts, a county court has the power in equity to determine if it is in the best interests of the beneficiaries to remove the trustee of the second trust. In re Conservatorship of Abbott, 295 Neb. 510, 890 N.W.2d 469 (2017).

A proceeding initiated under section 30-3814 and this section to remove a trustee is a special proceeding within the meaning of section 25-1902. In re Trust of Rosenberg, 269 Neb. 310, 693 N.W.2d 500 (2005).

A proceeding initiated under section 30-3814 and this section to remove a trustee is a special proceeding within the meaning of section 25-1902. In re Trust of Rosenberg, 269 Neb. 310, 693 N.W.2d 500 (2005).

The court has the authority to remove a trustee if the trustee has engaged in self-dealing. Sherman v. Sherman, 16 Neb. App. 766, 751 N.W.2d 168 (2008).

The court has the authority to remove a trustee if the trustee has engaged in self-dealing. Sherman v. Sherman, 16 Neb. App. 766, 751 N.W.2d 168 (2008).

The trial court did not refer to language of this section in finding that the cotrustee should be removed but made several factual findings supporting removal under this section, and the appellate court concluded that the cotrustee's actions when considered together justified removal of the cotrustee under this section. In re Charles C. Wells Revocable Trust, 15 Neb. App. 624, 734 N.W.2d 323 (2007).

The trial court did not refer to language of this section in finding that the cotrustee should be removed but made several factual findings supporting removal under this section, and the appellate court concluded that the cotrustee's actions when considered together justified removal of the cotrustee under this section. In re Charles C. Wells Revocable Trust, 15 Neb. App. 624, 734 N.W.2d 323 (2007).