Dingle v. Prikhdina
2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 5673
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Dingles sued for ejectment to recover the subject property in Lake County, Florida, attaching a quit-claim deed of gift from Whiteway to the Dingles.
- Kyreakakis moved for summary judgment asserting the decedent, as Whiteway’s attorney-in-fact, had no authority to gift corporate property; the court granted the motion.
- POA language showed authority to convey real property and other asset transfers but did not expressly authorize gifts.
- The POA was originally drafted in Spanish; the record includes an English translation; the deed was drafted by Ms. Dellinger and described as a gift.
- On appeal, the court affirmed, holding the power did not authorize gifts, so the deed was void; rationale tracked limitations on gifts under the POA with reference to case law.
- The court emphasized four asset-transfer categories (sale, lease, mortgage, gift) and found “gift” was not within the authorized scope absent express language.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the POA authorized a gift of corporate property. | Dingles | Kyreakakis | No express gift authority; gift invalid. |
| Whether the POA allowed asset transfer for valuable consideration only. | Dingles | Kyreakakis | Transfers require valuable consideration; gift not authorized. |
| Application of Florida case law to interpret POA scope. | Dingles | Kyreakakis | Johnson and related authorities control; gift not implied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bloom v. Weiser, 348 So.2d 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) (strict construction; powers limited to express terms)
- James v. James, 843 So.2d 304 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (gift requires express authorization)
- Johnson v. Fraccacreta, 348 So.2d 570 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) (no implied gift absent express grant)
- In re Estate of Bell, 573 So.2d 57 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (gifts require express scope within power)