SUN FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF POLK COUNTY, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MARGARET W. FRY, APPELLANT,
v.
HARRY E. FRY, JR., JOHN A. BELDING, JR., KIMBERLY A. FERGUSON, THOMAS MAXWELL FERGUSON, III, MICHAEL ANTHONY FERGUSON, SHERYL FERGUSON GAFFORD AND CHRISTOPHER LEE FERGUSON, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Sun First National Bank, as personal representative of Margaret W. Fry's estate, challenged a trial court order that diverted homestead property to lineal heirs rather than the decedent's testamentary trust. The appellate court reversed, holding that when a decedent is survived by no minor children and the surviving spouse has waived homestead rights, there is no constitutional restriction on devising homestead property.
When a decedent is survived by no minor children and the surviving spouse has waived homestead rights, there is no constitutional restriction on devising homestead property. Therefore, the decedent's will properly devised the homestead to the testamentary trust, and the property should not pass by intestacy to the lineal heirs.
[1] Homestead property may be devised by will when a decedent is survived by no minor children and the surviving spouse has waived homestead rights.
[2] A surviving spouse's valid waiver of homestead rights removes constitutional restrictions on devising homestead property.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“when a decedent is survived by no minor children and the surviving spouse has waived homestead rights, there is no constitutional restriction on devising homestead property”
This is the core holding establishing that the will's devise to the testamentary trust was valid and that homestead property could pass according to the will's terms.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMargaret W. Fry died testate on November 3, 1987, survived by six adult lineal descendants and a spouse who had validly waived his homestead rights. F…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Devise Of Homestead Property cases and more on FLexlaw
CAMPBELL, Acting Chief Judge.
Sun First National Bank of Polk County, as personal representative of the estate of Margaret W. Fry, deceased, challenges the trial court order finding that where decedent’s surviving spouse had validly waived his homestead rights and there were no minor children, decedent’s homestead property would pass directly to the lineal heirs, appellees. Sun First maintains that the property should pass by decedent’s will. We agree. City Nat’l Bank of Florida v. Tescher, 578 So. 2d 701 (Fla.1991); Hartwell v. Blasingame, 564 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).
Decedent died testate on November 3, 1987, survived by six adult lineal descendants and a spouse who had waived his homestead rights. Decedent’s will devised her homestead property to a testamentary trust, not to her spouse or lineal descendants.
The lineal descendants argue that they are entitled to the property under the homestead provisions of the Florida Constitution and statutes. Those provisions prohibit the devise of homestead if there is a surviving spouse or minor children, with one exception: If there are no minor children, homestead property may be devised to a surviving spouse. Art. X, § 4, Fla. Const.; § 732.4015, Fla.Stat. (1989). Under section 732.401(1), Florida Statutes (1989), if the homestead is not properly devised according to these provisions, it descends by intestacy, with the spouse taking a life estate and a vested remainder going to the lineal descendants.
The decedent’s lineal descendants maintain that because decedent was survived by a spouse, her will, devising the property to a trust, constituted an improper devise, bringing section 732.401(1) into operation, under which the property would pass by intestacy to them since decedent’s spouse had validly waived his rights to the proper ty. The trial court agreed, finding the lineal descendants were entitled to the property.
However, the Florida Supreme Court has recently ruled in accord with our decision in Hartwell on this issue, holding: “[W]hen a decedent is survived by no minor children and the surviving spouse has waived homestead rights, there is no constitutional restriction on devising homestead property.” 578 So. 2d at 703.
Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the trial court. We observe, in doing so, however, that the trial court decision was issued very shortly after this court’s opinion in Hartwell so that the trial court may not have had the benefit of Hartwell in reaching its decision.
FRANK and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Monks v. Smith, 609 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…ister. See City National Bank of Florida v. Tescher, 578 So. 2d 701 (Fla.1991) (homestead devised through residuary clause where there were no minor children and the spouse had waived homestead rights). Sun First National Bank of Polk County v. Fry, 579 So. 2d 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (decedent’s [*743] homestead property passed by will, rather than passing directly to her lineal heirs, where her surviving spouse validly waived homestead rights and there were no minor children). Because the homestead in this ca…
Authorities Cited
- City Nat'l Bank OF Fla. v. Tescher, 578 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 1991)
- Hartwell v. Blasingame, 564 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)