Agee v. Brown
73 So. 3d 882
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Herbert G. Birck died October 25, 2009; Roger L. Brown petitioned for administration and sought to admit the 2009 will to probate.
- In April 2010, Jon and Susan Agee filed a verified petition to revoke probate of the 2009 will, alleging undue influence and lack of testamentary capacity.
- The Agees based standing on a line of instruments culminating in a 2007 will in which they were beneficiaries and had a close relationship with the decedent.
- Brown moved to dismiss arguing the 2007 bequest to the Agees was void as contrary to public policy because it was drafted by the decedent’s attorney.
- The trial court granted dismissal with prejudice and ordered the Agee affidavit stricken from public records.
- The appellate court reversed, holding the Agees have standing to challenge the 2009 will and that striking the affidavit was improper; the matter was remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do the Agees have standing to revoke the 2009 will based on the 2007 will? | Agees, as beneficiaries under the prior will, are interested persons. | The drafting attorney's bequest barred the Agees’ standing under public policy and the probate code. | Yes; they have standing to petition. |
| Does voiding the 2007 bequest defeat standing to contest the 2009 will? | Even if the bequest were void, Agees remain interested persons under the prior will. | Void bequest under public policy should bar standing. | Standing remains; bequest voidness does not defeat standing. |
| Did the trial court improperly import Rule 4-1.8(e) into the probate code? | Statutes govern standing; policy-based exclusions were not legislatively added. | Public policy considerations support excluding the drafting attorney’s bequest. | Incorrect; do not add Bar Rule concepts to the probate code. |
| Was the trial court powerless to strike the Agee affidavit from public records? | No proper pleading or notice supported striking the affidavit. | Relief requested included striking a document. | Lacked jurisdiction to strike; strike improper. |
| Does an alternate personal representative under a prior will confer standing to contest a later will? | Under 731.201(23), the personal representative is an interested person. | Only beneficiaries under the later will matter for standing. | Yes; alternate PR status confers standing to contest the 2009 will. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wheeler v. Powers, 972 So.2d 285 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (standing of an interested person including beneficiaries of prior will)
- FCD Dev., LLC v. S. Fla. Sports Comm., Inc., 37 So.3d 905 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (de novo review of standing rulings; statutory interpretation limits)
- Lawnwood Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Seeger, 990 So.2d 503 (Fla. 2008) (courts cannot add words to statute not placed by Legislature)
- Boulis v. Blackburn, 16 So.3d 186 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (rejecting statutory interpretation that adds exclusions not in statute)
- Pro-Art Dental Lab, Inc. v. V-Strategic Grp., LLC, 986 So.2d 1244 (Fla. 2008) (due process concerns when pleading/noticing relief)
- Fogel v. Swarm, 523 So.2d 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (drafting by attorney raises rebuttable presumption of undue influence)