PAMELA B. STUART v. CATHERINE S. RYAN, DEBORAH A. STUART, 16-3921

Pamela B. Stuart (appellant and trustee) appealed a circuit court order approving a plan of distribution for her father’s estate after the court imposed an equitable lien against her interest in two Florida properties.
Stuart claimed Florida homestead protection for the properties, arguing they were exempt from liens under Art. X, § 4 of the Florida Constitution.
Appellees (beneficiaries Catherine S. Ryan and Deborah A. Stuart) contended an equitable lien was proper because of Pamela Stuart’s wrongful acts as trustee.
The trial court imposed the equitable lien against Pamela Stuart’s claimed homestead interest. Stuart contested the lien on appeal, asserting her homestead exemption barred it.
The appellate court examined homestead doctrine and exceptions, but concluded the dispositive factual issue was whether either Florida property was Pamela Stuart’s homestead; it found neither was her homestead because her principal residence was in Washington, D.C., she spent only limited time in Florida, and she had asserted two Florida properties as homestead.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Stuart)	Defendant's Argument (Beneficiaries)	Held
Whether an equitable lien could be imposed on property claimed as Florida homestead	Stuart: She qualified for Florida homestead protection; lien violated Art. X, § 4	Beneficiaries: Lien was proper because of Stuart’s wrongful acts as trustee and to secure estate interests	Court: An equitable lien would be improper if property were homestead, but here neither property was Stuart’s homestead, so lien validly imposed
Whether the two Florida properties were Stuart’s homestead	Stuart: She had Florida driver’s license, voter registration, church membership, and intended to make Florida her permanent residence	Beneficiaries: Stuart’s principal residence and ties were in D.C.; she spent limited time in Florida and claimed two homesteads	Court: Not homestead — principal residence in D.C., averaged ~59 days/year in Florida, held a reversible mortgage in D.C., and claimed two Florida homesteads (impermissible)

Butterworth v. Caggiano, 605 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 1992) (homestead exemption construed liberally; exceptions strictly construed)
Spector v. Spector, 226 So. 3d 256 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (recognition of limited additional exception for alimony creditors)
Anderson v. Anderson, 44 So. 2d 652 (Fla. 1950) (historical authority cited regarding homestead exceptions)
Palm Beach Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Fishbein, 619 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1993) (limitations on creating homestead exceptions beyond the constitution)