## Facts

- A family dispute arose over ownership of several Saunders County, Nebraska farm tracts, including the “Urbanek place,” “Pedersen place,” and “home place.”
- Record title to the Urbanek and Pedersen places was in Lad Cihal and Martha Cihal (née Brtek), who is Jaroslav “Jerry” Brtek’s sister.
- A 1960 deed conveyed the Urbanek place from Jerry’s brother Joe to Joe and Martha as joint tenants; the deed was kept unrecorded in the mother’s possession for a period.
- After Joe’s death, the mother produced and gave the deed to Martha, stating in substance that the farm was hers; Martha later deeded the farm to herself and Lad as joint tenants.
- Jerry remained on the farm property and, after the mother’s death, was asked by Martha to vacate.
- Jerry and his wife sued, seeking (1) a constructive or resulting trust giving them equitable ownership of the Urbanek and Pedersen places and (2) cancellation of the 1960 deed.
- The Cihals counterclaimed to set aside a separate deed by which the mother conveyed the home place to Jerry, alleging noncompliance with conditions.

## Issues

1. Whether the Brteks proved by clear and convincing evidence that a constructive trust or resulting trust should be imposed on the Urbanek and Pedersen places despite record title in the Cihals.
2. Whether the Brteks proved grounds to cancel or set aside the 1960 deed conveying the Urbanek place to Joe and Martha.
3. In an equitable action, how the appellate court’s de novo review interacts with deference to the trial court’s credibility determinations.

## Decision

- The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s judgment after de novo review of the equitable claims.
- The Court held the Brteks failed to establish, by clear and convincing evidence, either a constructive trust or a resulting trust in their favor.
- The Court held the Brteks failed to prove a basis to cancel the 1960 deed; the evidence did not show the deed was ineffective for lack of delivery or merely testamentary.
- The Court left undisturbed the decree’s practical effect: title to the Urbanek and Pedersen places remained with the Cihals, and title to the home place remained with the Brteks (the counterclaim dismissal was not appealed).

## Legal Principles

- A party seeking a constructive trust or resulting trust that contradicts record title must prove the trust by clear and convincing evidence.
- A constructive trust is imposed in equity to prevent unjust enrichment when property is held under circumstances that make it inequitable for the titleholder to retain beneficial ownership.
- A resulting trust may arise when circumstances show the titleholder was not intended to have beneficial ownership, including situations involving payment of purchase price by another or comparable proof of intended beneficial interest.
- In equitable actions, appellate courts review the record de novo but give weight to the trial court’s opportunity to observe witnesses and resolve conflicts in testimony.
- Delivery and surrounding intent are central to whether a deed operates as a present transfer; evidence that a deed was later handed over with an expressed intent to give effect to it can support a finding of effective delivery.

## Conclusion

The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the denial of equitable relief because the Brteks did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that the Cihals’ record title should be displaced by a constructive or resulting trust, and they did not establish grounds to cancel the 1960 deed transferring the Urbanek place.


Brtek v. Cihal, 515 N.W.2d 628 (Neb. 1994)