MARY ELLEN MCENDERFER, PETITIONER,
v.
JOHN C. KEEFE, RESPONDENT
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.
Homestead property, when not specifically devised and the decedent is not survived by a spouse or minor children, passes to residuary devisees, not general devisees.
The case involves a certified conflict regarding the distribution of a decedent's homestead property. The decedent was not survived by a spouse or min…
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 Testamentary Disposition cases and more on FLexlaw
QUINCE, J.
We have for review McEnderfer v. Keefe, 903 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005), which certified conflict with Warburton v. McKean, 877 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), quashed, 919 So. 2d 3410 (Fla.2005), and certified the following question, which was also certified in Warburton, as one of great public importance:
WHERE A DECEDENT IS NOT SURVIVED BY A SPOUSE OR ANY MINOR CHILD, DOES DECEDENT’S HOMESTEAD PROPERTY, WHEN NOT SPECIFICALLY DEVISED, PASS TO GENERAL DEVISEES BEFORE RESIDUARY DEVISEES IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 733.805, FLORIDA STATUTES?
We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. This Court recently quashed Warburton and answered the certified question in the negative. We therefore answer the certified question in this case in the negative and hold that where a decedent is not survived by a spouse or minor children, the decedent’s homestead property passes to the residuary devisees, not the general devisees, unless there is a specific testamentary disposition ordering the property to be sold and the proceeds made a part of the general estate. See McKean v. Warburton, 919 So. 2d 341 (Fla.2005).
Accordingly, the decision in McEnderfer 1 is approved in light of this Court’s decision in Warburton.
It is so ordered.
PARIENTE, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, LEWIS, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur. . Petitioner raised several issues that were either not directly addressed by the district court in this case or were merely implied or cursory, at best. We decline to address them in light of the controlling precedent of War-burton.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kasischke v. State, 991 So. 2d 803 (Fla. 2008)…obscene, pornographic, or sexually stimulating” material recovered from his home was relevant to his “deviant behavior pattern.” That issue has not been addressed in this case and is outside the scope of the conflict. See, e.g., McEnderfer v. Keefe, 921 So. 2d 597, 597 n. 1 (Fla.2006) (declining to reach issues “that were either not directly addressed by the district court ... or were merely implied or cursory, at best”); Gaines v. Sayne, 764 So. 2d 578, 586 (Fla. 2000) (declining to address an issue outside…
-
State v. Meshell, 2 So. 3d 132 (Fla. 2009)…urt. It is so ordered. QUINCE, C.J., WELLS, PARIENTE, and LEWIS, JJ., and ANSTEAD, Senior Justice, concur. CANADY, J., concurs in result only with an opinion. . We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. . See McEnderfer v. Keefe, 921 So. 2d 597, 597 n. 1 (Fla.2006) (declining to address issues not directly addressed by the district court).…
-
Chames v. DeMAYO, 972 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 2007)…2d at 555 (Shepherd, J., concurring). . DeMayo raises several claims (in both cases) that the district court did not specifically address and that are outside the scope of the certified question. We decline to address them. See McEnderfer v. Keefe, 921 So. 2d 597, 597 n. 1 (Fla.2006) (declining to reach issues "that were either not directly addressed by the district court ... or were merely implied or cursory, at best”); Major League Baseball v. Morsani, 790 So. 2d 1071, 1080 n. 26 (Fla.2001) (declining to a…
Authorities Cited
- McKEAN v. Warburton, 919 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 2005)
- Warburton v. McKEAN, 877 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- In re Est. OF Rachael Duffy Mahaney v. Keefe, 903 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)