IN RE ESTATE OF H. VIVIAN WALKER, DECEASED
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 estate of H. Vivian Walker contained a will leaving its residue equally to the Christian Science Church and CARE. When the designated Christian Science Church could not be identified, the county judge awarded the failed bequest to CARE under Florida Statute § 731.20(2). The appellate court upheld this determination, holding that lapsed portions of a residuary gift pass to remaining residuary beneficiaries under the statute absent contrary testamentary intent.
The lapsed portion of the residuary gift passes in toto to the remaining residuary beneficiary (CARE) under § 731.20(2). Section 731.20(2) applies to lapsed portions of residuary gifts when no contrary intent is expressed by the testator in the will.
“the share which failed remained as a part of the residue and passed in toto to the organization known as CARE under the authority of Section 731.20(2)”
The county judge's holding that lapsed bequests pass to remaining residuary beneficiaries under the statute
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceH. Vivian Walker died testate. Article XII of her will bequeathed "all the rest, residue and remainder" of her estate equally to the Christian Science…
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 Determination Of Beneficiaries cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from an order entered by the County Judge of Pinellas County on November 9, 1966. The facts are not in dispute.
H. Vivian Walker died testate. Article XII of her will reads as follows:
“All the rest, residue and remainder of my estate, I give, devise and bequeath equally to the Christian Science Church of which I am a member at the time of my death, and the organization known as CARE.”
The executors filed a petition for determination of beneficiaries reciting that they were unable to find any Christian Science Church of which she was a member at the time of her death, and that they were in doubt as to how to distribute the residuary proceeds.
The County Judge held that the bequest to the Christian Science Church failed. This holding is not attacked. He further held, however, that the share which failed remained as a part of the residue and passed in toto to the organization known as CARE under the authority of Section 731.20(2). The point raised by appellant is whether a lapsed portion of a residuum passes as intestate property under the law of descent and distribution, or passes by reason of Section 731.20(2) to the remaining residuary beneficiary. The Court below relied on the case of Magruder v. Magruder, Fla.App., 157 So.2d 86, which was decided by this Court on October 25, 1963. In Magruder it was held that Section 731.20(2) regarding lapsed or void legacies or devises should apply to lapsed portions of a residuary gift, and that no contrary intent was expressed by the testatrix in her will. In the instant case certainly no contrary intent appears.
Appellant attacks the holding of Magruder and asserts that it is contrary to the decision of the Supreme Court of Florida in the case of In Re Eltzeroth’s Estate, Fla. 1955, 83 So.2d 772. No mention of Section 731.20(2) is made in that case. Further, it appears to us that the testator expressed an intent contrary to the provisions of the statute. The will provided that all property of any kind should go to George C. Jarrett and Charles W. Jarrett. It further provided that in the event either was not living at the time of the testator’s death, his portion of the bequest should go to his children. We find the order of the Court below to be correct.
Affirmed.
ALLEN, Acting C. J., and SHANNON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Est. of Alice B. Clark, 212 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)…e law of descent and distribution.” This contention was rejected by the district court which concluded that Section 731.20 should apply to the lapsed portion of a residuary gift. This holding was recently followed in Estate of Walker, Fla. App.1967, 204 So. 2d 44. Additionally, although it was not expressly discussed, the court in Drafts v. Drafts, Fla.App.1959, 114 So. 2d 473, tacitly found that the anti-lapse provision of Section 731.20 applied to gifts in the residuary clause. Finally, upon review and c…
-
In re Est. OF H. Vivian Walker, 211 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 1968)…Certiorari denied without opinion. 204 So. 2d 44.…
-
In re Est. of Birdie H. Morgan v. Bates, 311 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Magruder v. Magruder, Fla.App.2d 1963, 157 So. 2d 86; In re Estate of Walker, Fla.App.2d 1967, 204 So. 2d 44; and In re Estate of Clark, Fla.App. 4th 1968, 212 So. 2d 72. McNULTY, C. J., and HOBSON and SCHEB, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Magruder v. Ches G. Magruder under the Last Will and Testament of Carrie Josie Magruder, 157 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- In re Eltzeroth's Estate. George C. Jarrett v. Roscoe G. Eltzeroth, 83 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 1955)