ALFRED DUPONT DENT, APPELLANT,
v.
J.C. BELIN, T.S. COLDEWEY, W.L. THORNTON, WILLIAM B. MILLS, AND NCNB NATIONAL BANK, AS TRUSTEES OF THE ALFRED I. DUPONT TESTAMENTARY TRUST, AND JIM SMITH, AS ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
Alfred duPont Dent, a trustee of the Alfred I. duPont testamentary trust, sought a declaratory judgment establishing his right to petition the circuit court for an increase in trustee compensation after his fellow trustees rejected his proposal. The trial court dismissed his petition, but the appellate court reversed, holding that Dent was entitled to have a court determine whether he could seek such relief under the declaratory judgment act.
A trustee is entitled to seek a declaration of rights regarding questions arising in trust administration, provided the petition demonstrates a bona fide, actual, present, practical need for the declaration and meets other established criteria. The trial court has jurisdiction under Florida's declaratory judgment statutes to consider such petitions, and the proper inquiry is whether the trustee is entitled to a declaration of rights, not whether he will ultimately succeed on the merits.
[1] A petition for declaratory judgment is sufficient if it shows entitlement to a declaration of rights, regardless of whether the plaintiff will ultimately succeed in their…
[2] The fact that a declaration of rights may be against the complainant does not preclude the right to seek a declaratory judgment.
Previewing 2 of 5 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 test of the sufficiency of a complaint in a declaratory judgment proceeding is not whether the complaint shows that the plaintiff will succeed in getting a declaration of rights in accordance with his theory and contention, but whether he is entitled to a declaration of rights at all.”
Establishes the proper standard for evaluating declaratory judgment petitions—focus on entitlement to a declaration, not ultimate success on merits.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDent was one of six trustees of the Alfred I. duPont testamentary trust established in 1935. When the other trustees rejected Dent's proposal to incre…
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 Adverse And Antagonistic Interest cases and more on FLexlaw
McCORD, GUYTE P. Jr. (Ret.), Associate Judge.
Alfred duPont Dent appeals from an order dismissing his petition for declaratory judgment with prejudice. We reverse.
Dent, one of six trustees of the Alfred I. duPont testamentary trust established in 1935, sought from the other trustees an increase in compensation set by the will at $5,000 per year. When this proposal was defeated, Dent filed a petition for declaratory judgment seeking a declaration of his right, as a single trustee, to apply to the circuit court for the deviation he desired. The remaining trustees responded with a motion to dismiss the petition, alleging that the trial court had no jurisdiction under the declaratory judgment statutes to consider Dent’s petition and, on the merits of the inquiry, that he alone could not seek deviation from the trust. The trial court, without explanation, dismissed the petition with prejudice.
The test of the sufficiency of a complaint in a declaratory judgment proceeding is not whether the complaint shows that the plaintiff will succeed in getting a declaration of rights in accordance with his theory and contention, but whether he is entitled to a declaration of rights at all. Durand v. Metropolitan Dade County, 472 So. 2d 865 (Fla.3d DCA 1985). See also Bartholf v. Bartholf, 108 So. 2d 905 (Fla. 1st DCA 1959) (the fact that a declaration may or must be against the complainant does not destroy the right to apply for declaratory judgment). Therefore, appel-lees’ arguments below as to the merits of Dent’s inquiry were misplaced and the proper issue was his entitlement to a declaration of rights.
The declaratory judgment act is to be liberally administered and construed. Section 86.101, Florida Statutes (1983). Section 86.041 provides that any person interested as a trustee in the administration of a trust may have a declaration of rights to determine any question arising in the administration of the trust (emphasis supplied). The petition itself must show a bona fide, actual, present, practical need for the declaration, deal with a present state of facts, show that a right of the complainant depends on the facts, involve a person with an actual, present, adverse and antagonistic interest in the subject matter, place the adverse interest before the court and seek more than advice or the satisfaction of curiosity. 19 Fla.Jur.2d Declaratory Judgments Section 9 (1980); May v. Holley, 59 So. 2d 636, 639 (Fla.1952). The circumstances of this case demonstrate fulfillment of these criteria.
The order granting the motion to dismiss the petition with prejudice is therefore re versed and the case remanded for consideration of the petition on its merits.
ERVIN and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rigby v. Vernie G. Liles, 505 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…of sufficiency of a complaint in a declaratory judgment proceeding is not whether the complaint shows that the plaintiff will prevail, but whether there is a bona fide dispute and the plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of rights. Dent v. Belin, 483 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). In this case, the declaratory judgment count alleges a personal interest by Marvin Rigby, that a bona fide dispute exists, and that alleged rights of the parties must be determined by the court. The complaint is, therefore, suff…
-
Williams Island Ventures, LLC v. DE LA Mora, 246 So. 3d 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)…ory judgment proceeding is not whether the complaint shows that the plaintiff will succeed in getting a declaration of rights in accordance with his theory and contention, but whether he is entitled to a declaration of rights at all." Dent v. Belin, 483 So. 2d 61, 62 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). As such, the trial court was required to decide whether Counts I and II of the Second Amended Complaint contained the required factual allegations that would support the taxpayers' entitlement to a declaration, regardless of…
-
Wells v. Cia M. Wells, 24 So. 3d 579 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)…iaries of a trust and, therefore, we hold that all antagonistic and adverse interests were before the court through the trustee. Id. at 713. Furthermore, “[t]he declaratory judgment act is to be liberally administered and construed.” Dent v. Belin, 483 So. 2d 61, 62 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Thus, we hold that pursuant to section 86.041, Fla. Stat., Cheryl, as a beneficiary and potentially wrongfully removed co-Trustee, has standing as an interested person to bring a cause of action for declaratory judgment in t…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Bartholf v. Bartholf, 108 So. 2d 905 (Fla. 1st DCA 1959)
- Durand v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 472 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)