Fintak v. Fintak
120 So. 3d 177
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2013Background
- Self-settled, inter vivos trust funded by settlor Edmund Fintak; Edmund and Shirley as spouses; Edmund and Thomas/John as cotrustees; trust distributions provided to Edmund during life and potential principal invasions upon written request; trust after Edmund’s death to six equal shares for his children, no provision for Shirley; disputes arise over undue influence and lack of testamentary capacity; Michigan probate proceedings list trust as beneficiary/asset; trial court granted summary judgment on Counts I–II based on renunciation and estoppel theories; Florida appellate court reverses and remands.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Renunciation rule applicability to self-settled trust | Renunciation not required for settlor challenging own trust | Renunciation required to bar vexatious/inequitable claims | Renunciation rule inapplicable; summary judgment reversed |
| Estoppel by acceptance of benefits | Edmund’s receipt of trust benefits cannot bar challenges | Acceptance creates estoppel to challenge validity | Estoppel by acceptance does not apply; not preclusive |
| Estoppel by demand for performance | Demands for performance/do codicil do not bar claims | Inconsistent demands/positions justify estoppel | No estoppel by performance; claims not barred |
| Judicial estoppel (inconsistent positions in Michigan probate) | Listing trust in probate documents not inconsistent with invalidity challenge | Michigan filing constitutes inconsistent position | Judicial estoppel not satisfied; not barred |
Key Cases Cited
- Barnett Nat’l Bank of Jacksonville v. Murrey, 49 So.2d 535 (Fla.1950) (renunciation rationale protect assets and ensure equity)
- Medary v. Dalman, 69 So.2d 888 (Fla.1954) (renunciation/form vs. substance where donee would be entitled anyway)
- Hamblett v. Hamblett, 6 N.H. 333 (N.H.1833) (renunciation origin in ecclesiastical courts)
- In re Estate of Filion, 353 So.2d 1180 (Fla.2d DCA 1977) (trust/beneficiary challenges; application of renunciation/estoppel concepts)
- In re Will of Smith, 582 S.E.2d 356 (N.C.App.2003) (estoppel/consistency in probate context)