Legal Opinion · Dissent

In re Estate of Read

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided July 10, 1985No. 84-901Published

1DissentHurley, Judge

Finding fundamental error, the majority reverses the probate court because it failed to detect and enforce an unpled affirmative defense. I cannot agree that the law imposes this duty on the probate court and, therefore, I dissent.

The facts are simple. The appellant personal representative was properly notified but elected not to file an objection to the appellee bank’s untimely claim. Moreover, the personal representative failed to file a timely motion for rehearing after the probate court ordered payment of the claim. In short, the personal representative did nothing to protect the estate.…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Steinhorst v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1982
  2. Johns, Et Ux. v. GillianSupreme Court of Florida · 1938
  3. Rinker Materials Corp. v. PALMER FIRST NAT. BANK & TRUST CO.Supreme Court of Florida · 1978
  4. North v. CulmerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1967
  5. Tuggle v. MaddoxSupreme Court of Florida · 1952

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API