DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, APPELLANT,
v.
B.R., A MINOR CHILD, APPELLEE
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.
The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court order requiring the Department of Children and Families to pay a $500 administrative fee for establishing a special needs trust for a disabled foster child aging out of care. The court held that such administrative fees should be paid from the child's trust funds rather than by DCF, following its precedent in R.I. v. Department of Children and Families.
The administrative fee to establish the special needs trust should be charged to and paid from the child's own trust funds, not by DCF. Because the fee directly benefits the child by enabling the administration of funds intended for the child's benefit, it constitutes an appropriate expenditure from the child's Master Trust.
[1] A trial court cannot order the Department of Children and Families to pay administrative fees for establishing a special needs trust when those fees are an appropriate ex…
[2] Administrative fees for setting up a special needs trust are an appropriate expenditure from a child's Master Trust if the trust is intended to benefit, and does benefit,…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“the expense of the administrative fee to set up the special needs trust to be an appropriate expenditure for the use of funds from the child's Master Trust because it was "intended to benefit, and [did] benefit [the child]."”
Establishes the legal principle that administrative fees for special needs trusts are proper trust expenditures when they benefit the child
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceB.R., a minor with mental disability, received Social Security benefits held in a Master Trust controlled by DCF. Upon reaching age eighteen and aging…
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 Foster Care cases and more on FLexlaw
*373 On Motion for Rehearing and Clarification
We grant the Department of Children and Families’ motion for rehearing, withdraw our previously issued opinion, and substitute the following in its place.
B.R., a minor, was receiving Social Security benefits as a result of her mental disability. The funds she received were kept in and controlled by a Master Trust. The Department of Children and Families (“DCF”) served as the trustee. After reaching eighteen years of age and thus aging out of foster care, B.R.’s continued need for education and mental health services required her to be moved to Crossroads. Because B.R. no longer qualified to have her funds controlled and monitored through a Master Trust, B.R. and DCF agreed that DCF would transfer the Master Trust funds into a new trust established through the Center for Special Needs Trust Administration. They also agreed that DCF would continue to serve as the new trust’s named trustee. To establish a trust with the Center for Special Needs Trust Administration, a $500 administrative fee must be paid. The trial court ordered DCF to pay this fee, and DCF challenges this order. Having addressed the propriety of ordering DCF to pay the administrative fee in a prior opinion, we reverse.
The facts in R.I. v. Department of Children and Families, 47 So.3d 357 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) are virtually identical to the facts of this case. In R.I., a developmentally disabled foster child who aged out of foster care appealed a trial court order denying his motion to order DCF to pay the administrative fee for setting up a special needs trust for him after he became an adult. This court found the expense of the administrative fee to set up the special needs trust to be an appropriate expenditure for the use of funds from the child’s Master Trust because it was “intended to benefit, and [did] benefit [the child].” Id. at 360. Therefore, we affirmed the lower court’s order to charge the administrative cost to the trust and not DCF. Id. at 361. This case presents the same scenario. Unfortunately, the trial court did not have the benefit of our decision in R.I. before ordering DCF to pay the administrative fee.
Reversed.
MAY, C.J., and DAMOORGIAN, J., concur.