Summary
A Florida appellate court held that a payable-on-death (POD) account designation is a will substitute subject to invalidation for undue influence, applying the presumption of undue influence when a beneficiary in a confidential relationship actively procures the designation. The court also affirmed that a trial court may order a personal representative to return improperly disbursed estate funds under section 733.812, Florida Statutes, as an alternative to a money judgment, and that civil contempt protections prevent unconstitutional incarceration.
Holdings
- A POD designation, as a will substitute, is subject to challenge and invalidation on grounds of undue influence under Florida law, consistent with the state's public policy against abuse of fiduciary or confidential relationships.
- An order requiring a personal representative to return to the estate the specific amount of money improperly disbursed from credit union accounts is proper and authorized under section 733.812, Florida Statutes; the availability of contempt sanctions for noncompliance does not render the order erroneous, and any challenge to incarceration is premature where none has been ordered.
Questions Presented
- Whether a payable-on-death (POD) designation can be invalidated for undue influence under Florida law.
- Whether the trial court had authority to order the personal representative to return improperly disbursed funds to the estate, rather than entering a money judgment.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (18)
- In re Estate of Carpenter, 253 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1971)(applied)
- Robert Blechman and Cathy Blechman Chermak v. Estate of Bertram Blechman, Blechman v. Estate of Blechman, 160 So. 3d 152 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)(cited)
- Cripe v. Atl. First Nat'l Bank of Daytona Beach, 422 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 1982)(applied)
- Estate of Kester v. Rocco, 117 So. 3d 1196 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)(applied)
- Laushway v. Onofrio, 670 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)(applied)
- Fogel v. Swann, 523 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)(applied)
- Majorana v. Constantine, 318 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)(applied)
- Pate v. Mellen, 275 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)(applied)
- Brown v. Brown, Brown v. Brown, 149 So. 3d 108 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)(distinguished_from)
- In re Totten, 71 N.E. 748 (N.Y. 1904)(cited)
Showing top 10 of 18.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…