SONIA FELDMANN RISOLIA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI, 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.
A beneficiary of a residuary trust challenged the trial court's determination that income accrued during the prolonged administration of an estate should go to the widow beneficiary of a separate trust rather than to the residuary trust. The court affirmed, holding that the widow's right to income vested immediately upon the testator's death, regardless of whether the specific trust assets were not yet determined.
The widow's right to receive income from the trust vested immediately upon the testator's death, and therefore income accruing during the administration period belongs to her, even though the specific assets and amount of income could not be determined until later. The trial court's judgment was affirmed as conforming to Florida Statute § 733.01.
“the right of the widow as beneficiary of the first trust to receive the interest therefrom 'immediately vests so that any income from trust assets begins upon testator's death, although the specific assets are of necessity not determined until later.'”
States the core holding that the widow's income right vested immediately at death regardless of later asset determination
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarlyle Feldmann died in 1959 leaving a will that created two trusts: one general legacy trust providing income to his widow Irene for life, and a res…
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 Vesting Of Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant is a beneficiary of a residuary trust created by the will of Carlyle Feldmann, who died in 1959. The testator’s will created two trusts. One was a general legacy to the trustees with provision for payment of the income therefrom to his widow (Irene Feldmann) for life.1 The other, the residuary trust under which the appellant claims, directed payment of $100 per month to the testator’s brother Roy R. Feldmann, during his lifetime, and that the balance of the net income be paid quarterly to the appellant.
On December 13, 1965, the appellant sued in the circuit court for declaratory decree to determine whether, under the will, the income which accrued during the prolonged period of “administration” of the estate should go to the widow or should become a part of the residuary trust. Provisions of the will as to the property to be included in the first trust had delayed the final determination of the assets thereof.
By a judgment dated December 14, 1967, as amended on rehearing by an order dated July 8, 1968, the circuit court held that the right of the widow as beneficiary of the first trust to receive the interest therefrom “immediately vests so that any income from trust assets begins upon testator’s death, although the specific assets are of necessity not determined until later.” Appellant filed separate appeals therefrom.
*715In so holding the trial court was eminently correct. The widow’s right to receive the income was conferred by the will. The fact that the amount of the income from the trust property for those intervening years could not be determined at the time was no reason to deprive the widow of the income she was entitled to receive for such period when the amount later is determined. The decision of the trial court conforms to the provisions of § 733.01 Fla.Stat., F.S.A. applicable in such circumstances.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Est. of Carlyle Feldmann, 224 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…t under this state of the pleadings no error has been shown by appellant’s third point. The final order appealed is affirmed. . We have previously had before us another aspect of this controversy. See Risolia v. First National Bank, Fla.App. 1969, 224 So. 2d 714 (1969). . “THIS CAUSE CAME ON to be heard before me upon the ‘Objections to Accounting and Petition for Discovery, Accounting, Removal of the Executor and other relief’ filed by Sonia Feldman (sic) Risolia, and the Court having considered and duly…
-
Risolia v. First Nat'l Bank of Miami, 234 So. 2d 119 (Fla. 1969)…Certiorari denied without opinion. 224 So. 2d 714.…
-
In re Est. of Carlyle Feldmann, 257 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)…er courts and F.S. §§ 734.05 and 734.06, F.S.A. We hold that the order appealed directs distribution of the income in accordance with the applicable statutes and the directions of this court in Risolia v. First National Bank of Miami, Fla.App.1969, 224 So. 2d 714 and In Re Estate of Feldmann, Fla.App.1969, 224 So. 2d 715. Appellant’s second point urges error upon the denial of her motion for appointment of an appraiser. This motion set forth that the will provides that there was a general bequest to a marit…1 / 2