Dennis v. Kline
120 So. 3d 11
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2013Background
- Settlor created a pour-over will funding a trust with a Family Portion split into Family Trust A and Family Trust B for his five children.
- Family Trust A allowed no power of appointment; eligibility of beneficiaries follows per stirpes to issue, with potential sideways distribution if no issue.
- Family Trust B granted a general power of appointment to the children; Family Trust A constrains disposition to the Settlor’s issue.
- In 2011, Dianna, one child, adopted a 27-year-old Pennsylvania woman (the adoptee) in Pennsylvania; adoption was completed without notice to Florida interests.
- Harriet (another child) sought to exclude the adoptee from being a qualified beneficiary under the Trust, arguing it would defeat the Settlor’s intent to keep assets in the family.
- The circuit court granted summary judgment excluding the adoptee; the appellate court reverses, citing unresolved Settlor intent and Florida public policy considerations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether adult adoption can qualify as inheritance under Florida trusts. | Dennis (trust) intended to keep assets to bloodline via Trust A. | Florida law permits adult adoption and adoptees may be treated as issue under the trust. | Adoptees may be beneficiaries; public policy not controlling. |
| Whether the trial court properly resolved the settlor’s intent on summary judgment. | Intent shown by Trust terms and amendments; adoption defeats material purpose only if proven. | Trust terms show restricted descent; intent can be inferred from structure and adoption. | Intent is a fact question unsuitable for summary judgment. |
| Whether Pennsylvania adoption procedures negate full faith and credit for Florida purposes. | PA adoption lacks notice to financial interested parties; not entitled to full faith and credit. | Full faith and credit requires comity; no repugnant policy; PA notice differences not fatal. | PA adoption entitled to full faith and credit; no repugnancy found. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Adoption of Holland, 965 So.2d 1213 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (public policy recognized to permit adult adoption under Florida law)
- Strochak v. Fed. Ins. Co., 717 So.2d 453 (Fla. 1998) (presumption Florida law applies to insurance contracts)
- Rickard v. McKesson, 774 So.2d 838 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (fraud upon the court in an adult adoption case to defeat a beneficiary)
- Kupec v. Cooper, 593 So.2d 1176 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992) (full faith and credit; public policy exceptions are narrow)
- Tsilidis v. Pedakis, 132 So.2d 9 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961) (early adoption recognition of non-traditional adoption types)
- Nahar v. Nahar, 656 So.2d 225 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (comity and full faith and credit principles in foreign judgments)
- Embry v. Ryan, 11 So.3d 408 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (comity and recognizing sister-state judgments)
- In re Miller, 227 So.2d 73 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969) (statutory construction; adoptions in derogation of common law require strict interpretation)