JOSEPH NELSON VS DARCELLE MCNEILL, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF JOSEPH NELSON
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.
A probate court's order disinheriting a party as a sanction for willful noncompliance with court orders is final and appealable, but an order imposing a monetary sanction that requires further judicial determination of the amount is not final.
[1] An order disinheriting a party from an estate as a sanction for willful noncompliance with court orders is a final, appealable order because no further judicial labor is…
[2] An order imposing a monetary sanction that does not specify the amount and contemplates further judicial determination of that amount is not a final, appealable order und…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“orders which clearly contemplate additional judicial labor by the probate court do not finally determine a right or obligation”
Court's explanation for dismissing the monetary sanction portion of the appeal as not yet final
Joseph Nelson appealed a probate court order imposing sanctions against him, including disinheritance from an estate and a monetary sanction. The prob…
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.
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
Case No. 6D23-1276 Lower Tribunal No. 2018-CP-000153
JOSEPH NELSON, Appellant,
v.
DARCELLE MCNEILL, as personal representative of the ESTATE OF JOSEPH NELSON Appellee.
Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.130 from the Circuit Court for Osceola County. Robert J. Egan, Judge.
May 5, 2023
NARDELLA, J.
Joseph Nelson (“Nelson”) appeals the probate court's March 3, 2022 order imposing sanctions against him.¹
Because judicial labor remains to determine the amount of the monetary sanction against Nelson, we dismiss that portion of the appeal. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.170(b) (limiting appeals to orders that finally determine a right or obligation of an interested person as defined in the Florida Probate Code); see also N. Tr. Co. as T.
of Elizabeth W. Walker Tr. v. Abbott, 313 So. 3d 792, 795 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (noting that orders which clearly contemplate additional judicial labor by the probate court do not finally determine a right or obligation). As to the probate court's determination that Nelson shall not receive any distribution from the Estate we find that portion of the trial court's order to be final because no further judicial labor is required to disinherit Nelson. See id. We further find that the probate court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Nelson's failure to comply with its earlier order was willful and wanton. See Mercer v. Raine, 443 So. 2d 944, 946 (Fla. 1983) (affirming trial court's order granting sanctions where record contained logical basis for exercise of trial court's discretion and trial court found defendant's actions amounted to willful disregard). Accordingly, we affirm that portion of the probate court's order without further discussion.
DISMISSED in part; AFFIRMED in part.
SASSO, C.J., and WOZNIAK, J., concur.
Serena M. Kurtz, of Kurtz Law Offices, LLC, Orlando, for Appellant. David E. Borack, of Borack Law Group, P.A., Longwood, for Appellee.