ELIZABETH ZULON, APPELLANT,
v.
DAVID PECKINS, 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 removing a co-personal representative without notice or an evidentiary hearing violates due process requirements.
The appellant was removed as co-personal representative of her father's estate by the probate court without notice or an evidentiary hearing. The cour…
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 Probate Administration cases and more on FLexlaw
ON MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
We grant the appellee’s motion for clarification, withdraw this court’s previous opinion dated February 8, 2012, and issue this opinion in its stead.
The appellant, Elizabeth Zulon, appeals from an order of the probate court removing her as co-personal representative of her father’s estate. Because removal was ordered without notice or an evidentiary hearing, “the ruling did not meet even the most rudimentary requirements of due process.” LoCascio v. Estate of LoCascio, 78 So.3d 573, 574 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011). We reverse and remand with instructions to reinstate the co-personal representatives;1 discharge Mr. Peckins as successor personal representative; and conduct a duly noticed evidentiary hearing regarding the *648removal of Elizabeth Zulon and Ana Zu-lon as co-personal representatives.2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lezcano v. In re Est. OF Exzun Lazaro Hidalgo, 88 So. 3d 306 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)…assets into [a] restricted depository” and related alleged misdeeds. “Because [the] removals were] ordered without notice or an evidentiary hearing, ‘the ruling did not meet even the most rudimentary requirements of due process.’ ” Zulon v. Peckins, 81 So. 3d 647 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (quoting LoCascio v. Estate of LoCascio, 78 So. 3d 573, 574 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)). We reverse and remand with instructions to reinstate Lezcano as personal representative of the estate and co-trustee of the trust, and discharge Mr.…
Authorities Cited
- LoCASCIO v. The Est. OF Silvia M. LoCASCIO, 78 So. 3d 573 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)