76 So. 3d 31
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2011Background
- Roy Sanders is a trust beneficiary; Doris Corya is trustee and mother of Eleanor Rich’s line of trusts.
- trusts involved include Eleanor Rich Trust (New York law per trust provision) and two Corya trusts (Florida trusts created in 1993) that allow discretionary accounting to beneficiaries.
- Roy alleged the trusteeship owed annual accountings for four trusts; Doris defended with affirmative defenses including statute of limitations, waiver, and estoppel (la-ches).
- The trial court granted summary judgment requiring accountings and awarded attorney’s fees to Roy; Doris appealed.
- On appeal, the court held there are disputed material facts and Doris waived reliance on New York law; summary judgment was reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.
- During the appeal, Doris filed accountings which Roy objected to as incomplete; the court noted the issue is not moot and may affect attorney’s fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Governance law for trusts (New York vs Florida) | Roy contends New York law governs the Eleanor Rich and Sanders trusts. | Doris argues New York law should apply; Florida law as to accounting. | Waived NY law; Florida law applies for accounting issues. |
| Entitlement to annual accountings for four trusts | Roy requests annual accountings under trust provisions. | Doris contends no duty or limitations or exceptions negate accounting. | Disputed facts exist; summary judgment improper. |
| Effect of affirmative defenses on summary judgment | Roy must negate defenses or show they are legally insufficient. | Doris asserts estoppel, waiver, laches, and statute of limitations as defenses. | Roy failed to negate these defenses; error in granting summary judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So.2d 126 (Fla. 2000) (standard of review for summary judgment; favorable view of non-movant record)
- Weinstein Design Group, Inc. v. Fielder, 884 So.2d 990 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (de novo review for summary judgment)
- Fini v. Glascoe, 936 So.2d 52 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (trial court’s accounting decisions reviewed de novo)
- Patten v. Winderman, 965 So.2d 1222 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (de novo review of accounting orders)
- Albelo v. S. Bell, 682 So.2d 1126 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (burden on moving party to show no genuine issue exists)
- Frost v. Regions Bank, 15 So.3d 905 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (affirmative defenses must be negated to grant summary judgment)
- Knight Energy Servs., Inc. v. Amoco Oil Co., 660 So.2d 786 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (affirmative defenses must be legally sufficient to defeat summary judgment)