EMILY YAWN ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
EUGENIA C. BLACKWELL, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF ELIZABETH LESESNE COLLINS, DECEASED, 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 the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because genuine issues of material fact exist regarding whether a resulting trust, rather than a constructive trust, was established.
[1] A statute of repose, such as section 95.231, Florida Statutes, may bar claims for constructive trusts after a specified period from the recording of a deed or probate of…
[2] The statute of limitations for a resulting trust does not begin to run until the alleged trustee denies the trust relationship or asserts an interest antagonistic to the…
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 intelligencePlaintiffs sought imposition of a trust upon real property held by the defendant, initially alleging a constructive trust and later amending to claim …
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 Imposition Of A Resulting Trust cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The plaintiffs appeal a summary final judgment for the defendant. The plaintiffs in their complaint prayed for the imposition of a trust described as a constructive trust upon real property the title of which is held by the defendant, Eugenia C. Blackwell. The complaint was amended without changing any factual allegations to describe the trust claimed as a resulting trust.
There are many issues of fact appearing from the pleadings and affidavits before the trial court. The court determined that there was no genuine issue of material fact because, under the facts presented, the plaintiffs’ claim was actually for the imposition of a constructive trust, which imposition is barred by Section 95.231, Florida Statutes (1975).
“95.231 Limitations where deed or will on record.—
“(2) After 20 years from the recording of a deed or the probate of a will purporting to convey real property, no person shall assert any claim to the property against the claimants under the deed or will or their successors in title.”
See Wadlington v. Edwards, 92 So. 2d 629 (Fla.1957).
Plaintiffs urge that the determination was improperly made upon summary judgment. See the discussion in Baskin v. Griffith, 127 So. 2d 467, 473-474 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961). The Supreme Court of Florida, in speaking of the application of the twenty year statute of repose has held that there is a difference in the application of the statute to resulting trusts and to constructive trusts.
“Appellant relies on cases holding that a statute of limitations will not run against the rights of a beneficiary as opposed to the trustee in an express trust or in a resulting trust until such time as the alleged trustee denies the trust relationship or otherwise asserts an interest antagonistic to the beneficiary. Appellant then reasons that she was not bound to act until such time as the appellee affirmatively moved to destroy the trust relationship and set up an antagonistic interest.
“The difficulty with appellant’s position simply is that this rule does not apply to constructive trusts. The obvious reason for the distinction is apparent. A constructive trust has its inception in an antagonistic relationship. It is founded in a situation produced by fraud, undue influence, abuse of confidence or mistake. The rights of the beneficiary as against the antagonistic claims of the trustee under a deed such as the one before us come into being when the deed is recorded or at the earliest when the beneficiary knew or should have known of the adverse claim of the trustee.”
* * sft * * *
Wadlington v. Edwards, 92 So. 2d 629 at 631-632 (Fla.1957). See also Grapes v. Mitchell, 159 So. 2d 465 (Fla.1963); and Peacock v. Firman, 177 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965).
We hold that it does not appear at this stage of the cause that plaintiffs do not have an action for a resulting trust. Therefore, there are genuine issues of material fact and the trial court will determine from the evidence presented whether a resulting trust came into being.
Reversed and remanded.
HENDRY, C. J., dissents.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rigby v. Vernie G. Liles, 505 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…rding. Id. at 461. Cases falling under § 95.231 include actions to quiet title and to establish resulting trusts, void deeds, dower interest, and defective deeds. See Creary v. Estate of Creary, 338 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Yawn v. Blackwell, 343 So. 2d 906 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Holland v. Hattaway, supra. The counts for quiet title and reformation before us do not conclusively appear, as a matter of law, to be suits to “recover real property or its possession” within the meaning of the seven year limit…
-
Palmland Villas I Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Taylor, 390 So. 2d 123 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…trust may be barred if the events giving rise to the necessity for the imposition of this equitable remedy transpired beyond the period permitted by the applicable statute of limitations, usually expressed in terms of laches. See Yawn v. Blackwell, 343 So. 2d 906 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). This leads inevitably to the conclusion that a constructive trust is not created by the facts themselves since no trust is found where the operable facts occur beyond the statutory period. The facts simply form the basis upon whi…
-
In re Gen. Coffee Corp. v. Gen. Coffee Corp., 828 F.2d 699 (11th Cir. 1987)…rida appellate decision to reject the majority approach was Palmland Villas. Palmland Villas did not cite any of the cases mentioned above. The court relied exclusively on Wadlington v. Edwards, 92 So. 2d 629 (Fla.1957) and [*703] Yawn v. Blackwell, 343 So. 2d 906 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). The court’s entire reasoning was .as follows: An action for the declaration of a constructive trust may be barred if the events giving rise to the necessity for the imposition of this equitable remedy transpired beyond the perio…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wadlington v. Edwards, 92 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 1957)
- Norris F. Baskin and Ola G. Baskin v. Griffith, 127 So. 2d 467 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961)
- Grapes v. Mitchell, 159 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 1963)
- Peacock v. Firman, 177 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)