ELAINE D. PLATT, APPELLANT,
v.
SHARON DAY OSTEEN ETC., ET AL., 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.
Elaine Platt appealed an order admitting Martin Day's will to probate and appointing Sharon Day Osteen as personal representative. The court reversed because the trial court failed to provide Platt with notice of the will submission and adjudicate her will contest before admitting the will, in violation of Florida probate law.
The trial court erred by admitting the will to probate without first providing notice to Platt and adjudicating her will contest. The court reversed and remanded for the trial court to determine whether Platt has standing to contest the will and, if so, to adjudicate her challenge before taking action on the petition for administration.
[1] A will contest and the rights of a caveator must be determined prior to admitting a will to probate or appointing a personal representative under Florida law.
[2] A trial court may not admit a will to probate or appoint a personal representative without service of formal notice on a caveator after a caveat has been filed.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“will contests and the rights of caveators must be determined prior to admitting a will to probate, appointing a personal representative or issuing letters of administration”
Establishes the mandatory procedural requirement that will contests must be adjudicated before will admission
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMartin Day died and Sharon Day Osteen filed a petition for administration of his will. Elaine Platt, listed as a daughter in the will but not the biol…
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 Petition For Administration cases and more on FLexlaw
Elaine D. Platt timely appeals an order admitting the will of Martin S. Day to probate and appointing Sharon Day Os-teen as personal representative. After Os-teen filed a petition for administration of Day’s will, Platt filed a caveat, followed by an answer and objection to administration of the will. Under Florida law, will contests and the rights of caveators must be determined prior to admitting a will to probate, appointing a personal representative or issuing letters of administration. See, e.g., Rocca v. Boyansky, 80 So.3d 377 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012); In re Estate of Hartman, 836 So.2d 1038 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Grooms v. Royce, 638 So.2d 1019 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); see also 18 Fla. Jur.2d Decedents’ Property § 494 (“After the filing of a caveat by an interested person other than a creditor, the court may not admit a will of the decedent to probate or appoint a personal representative without service of formal notice on the caveator or the cave-ator’s designated agent. [Fla. Prob. R. 5.260(f).] Thus, if a caveat is filed, a formal notice of the submission of a will for probate must be given, and the court must thereafter adjudicate any challenge to the will before admitting the will to probate.”). Here, without notice to Platt, the trial court simply entered an order admitting the decedent’s will to probate, erroneously finding that “no objection [had] been made to its probate[.]” Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions that the trial court determine whether Platt has standing to contest the will;1 and, if she does, to adjudicate Platt’s challenge to the will before taking any action on the petition for administration.
REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.
GRIFFIN, PALMER and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- In re the Matter of Determination of Heirs OF Octavia Hodge v. Burnett, 470 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- In re the Est. OF Laura L. Hartman v. Eberhardt, 836 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
- Rocca v. Boyansky, 80 So. 3d 377 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)
- Grooms v. Royce, 638 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)