Hill v. Davis
70 So. 3d 572
| Fla. | 2011Background
- Katherine Davis died in Florida in 2007; Douglas Davis, a New York resident, petitioned to be appointed personal representative as decedent's stepson and was nominated in the will.
- The probate court admitted the will and appointed Davis; letters of administration issued; notice of administration published and served on Solveig Hill, decedent's mother, on July 24, 2007.
- Hill challenged Davis's qualifications as a nonresident personal representative under § 733.304(3) in August 2008.
- At hearings in March and June 2009, the trial court again rejected Hill's challenge, ruling Davis was qualified to serve as nonresident PR.
- The circuit court issued a July 10, 2009 order finding Davis qualified and Hill's objection was untimely under § 733.212(3).
- The First District affirmed, holding that § 733.212(3) bars Hill's untimely objection to qualifications, except where fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct was not apparent within the statutory time frame.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does § 733.212(3) bar objections to qualifications when the PR was never qualified? | Hill: Angelus allows exception; untimely but not barred. | Davis: timely under § 733.212(3); no exception applies. | Yes; bar applies; no exception for never-qualified where fraud not alleged. |
| Whether the court should follow Angelus v. Pass regarding nonresident qualifications and the three-month limit. | Hill relies on Angelus to avoid § 733.212(3) bar. | Davis asserts Angelus misreads text; time bar applies. | Disapprove Angelus to the extent it says no bar; adopt Hill's interpretation. |
| Is the Florida Probate Code a unified scheme requiring application of § 733.212(3) to objections to nonresident qualifications? | Hill contends nonresident statutes operate outside § 733.212(3). | Davis argues unified statutory scheme supports § 733.212(3) applicability. | Yes; § 733.212(3) applies within the unified Probate Code. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hill v. Davis, 70 So. 3d 572 (Fla. 2011) (supreme court decision at issue, addressing timing of objections to qualifications)
- Angelus v. Pass, 868 So. 2d 571 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (held three-month limit does not bar untimely petition when nonresident was never qualified)
- Heart of Adoptions, Inc. v. J.A., 963 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 2007) (standard of review: statutory interpretation; legislative intent governs)
- Holly v. Auld, 450 So. 2d 217 (Fla. 1984) (textualism in statutory interpretation; cannot extend plain terms)
- GTC, Inc. v. Edgar, 967 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 2007) (read statutes in pari materia to harmonize related provisions)
- Florida Dept. of Children & Family Servs. v. P.E., 14 So. 3d 228 (Fla. 2009) (statutory interpretation within Florida courts; legislative intent control)