WALTER J. MIGOSKI, APPELLANT,
v.
MARIE HOLLOWED, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ANNA CERNY, 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 an attorney for a personal representative cannot be charged a penalty for failure to file a federal estate tax return when a prior court order excluded the relevant assets from the estate.
An attorney represented a personal representative in an estate. The trial judge assessed a penalty against the attorney for failing to file a federal …
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 Probate Act cases and more on FLexlaw
PEARSON, Judge.
The appellant is an attorney who represented Laddie Polivka, a former personal representative in the estate of Anna Cerny, deceased. After the resignation of Laddie Polivka and the appointment of a new personal representative, who secured a different attorney, the trial judge assessed against Walter J. Migoski the sum of $357.63 as a penalty for his failure to file a federal estate tax return. This appeal is from that assessment. No brief has been filed by the appellee.1
We do not reach the question of whether an estate tax return was required in this case, nor do we determine whether Migoski was negligent in failing to file such a return. It is sufficient to point out that the record reveals an order on petition for instructions which contains a specific provision that the assets, later held to be a portion of the estate for tax purposes, were to be specifically excluded from the probate of the estate. We find no provision of the probate act which allows for a charge against the attorney for a personal representative in circumstances such as above recited. We, therefore, reverse upon authority of Holland v. McGill, 107 Fla. 444, 145 So. 210 (1932).
Reversed and remanded with directions to strike the provision in the order of June 23, 1976, requiring Walter J. Migoski, as attorney, to pay “any penalty and interest charged by the Internal Revenue Service.”
Reversed and remanded.
. See Chamberlain v. Lesley, 39 Fla. 452, 22 So. 736 (1897). See also In Re Krugle’s Estate, 134 So. 2d 860 (Fla.2d DCA 1961).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Chamberlain v. Lesley, 39 Fla. 452 (Fla. 1897)
- Holland v. McGill, 107 Fla. 444 (Fla. 1932)
- In re Est. of Frank J. Krugle v. Bobier, 134 So. 2d 860 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961)