RICHARD GOLDSTEIN AND JEFFREY E. LEVEY, AS CO-PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ESTATE OF A. GLENN BRASWELL, DECEASED, APPELLANTS,
v.
RENEE BRASWELL, 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 court held that while the order subjecting a decedent's corporate shares to judgments was valid, execution could not proceed immediately due to his death.
A marital settlement agreement subjected a husband's corporate shares to his ex-wife's judgments. The husband died during supplementary proceedings to…
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 Proceedings Supplementary cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.
As we and the parties agree, that portion of the order in proceedings supple mentary below which subjected A. Glenn Braswell’s ownership of all the shares of While Away, Ltd., a corporation which owns a boat and a slip, to judgments secured by his ex-wife1 against him, pursuant to a March 2000 marital settlement agreement between the parties, see Braswell v. Braswell, 881 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004), must be affirmed.
Because, however, Braswell died during the course of the proceedings, the trial judge erred in ordering execution against the shares to proceed immediately. In these circumstances, the property of a decedent is properly subject to distribution only in his estate as directed by the probate court. See § 733.706, Fla. Stat. (2006); May v. Ill. Nat’l Ins. Co., 771 So. 2d 1143 (Fla.2000); Castro v. E. Pass Enters., Inc., 881 So. 2d 699, 701 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Hogan v. Howard, 716 So. 2d 286, 287-88 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); In re Estate of Lunga, 360 So. 2d 109, 111 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert, denied, 366 So. 2d 882, 883 (Fla.1978). Accordingly, although the “While Away” aspect of the order under review is affirmed, the order directing execution is vacated with directions that the claims of Mrs. Braswell on her judgments against the assets of Mr. Braswell, including his interest in the corporation, be administered in his estate.
Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.
. This is at least the twentieth appellate chapter of the Tolstoyan saga which began with Braswell v. Braswell, 763 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (table). Only just now, the end may be in distant sight.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Braswell v. Ryan Invs., Ltd., 989 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge. This case involves a separate aspect of the judgment considered in Goldstein v. Braswell, 987 So. 2d 123 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). Mrs. Braswell is the holder of approximately $24 million in judgments against her now-deceased former husband based on his failure to make payments required by and under a March 2000 marital settlement agreement. See Braswell v.…
Authorities Cited
- David R. MAY Ad Litem of the Estate of Oscar T. Bradley v. Ill. Nat'l Ins. Co., 771 So. 2d 1143 (Fla. 2000)
- Braswell v. Braswell, 881 So. 2d 1193 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)
- Kahn v. State, 881 So. 2d 699 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
- In re Est. of Alek G. Lunga v. Koppen, 360 So. 2d 109 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Hogan v. Howard, 716 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)