Gregor Woodward v. Orator E. Woodward, individually, and as Trustee of the Mary T. Woodward Trust u/a/d January 14, 1972, as Trustee of the El Bravo Trust u/a/d May 31, 2002, and as Trustee of the Serena Mary Elizabeth Woodward Trust u/a/d May 31, 2002, Lorence Woodward, Marcus Woodward, Serena Woodward, and Maureen Woodward

Woodward v. Woodward, No. 4D15-449, 2016 WL 2353124 (Fla. 4th DCA May 4, 2016) · District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District · No. 4D15-449

Summary

In Woodward v. Woodward, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal held that res judicata did not bar a beneficiary’s 2012 breach-of-fiduciary-duty claim because the claim arose from a 2002 trust termination and asset transfer—events occurring after the prior 1996 action—and thus lacked identity of the cause of action. The court also held that laches did not bar the claim because the statute of limitations under section 736.1008, Florida Statutes, began to run upon the beneficiary’s receipt of trust accountings in 2011, and the beneficiary timely filed within six months; further, the trial court could not weigh evidence on summary judgment to find clear and convincing evidence of actual knowledge. This case clarifies the application of res judicata to claims involving different time periods and the accrual rules for breach-of-trust actions under Florida’s trust code.

Holdings

  1. Res judicata does not bar the 2012 action because there is no identity of the cause of action between the 1996 and 2012 suits; the facts necessary to maintain the 2012 suit concern events occurring in 2002, after the 1996 complaint, and involve a different breach of fiduciary duty.
  2. Laches does not bar the action because the statute of limitations did not begin to run until the beneficiary received the trust accountings in October 2011, and the beneficiary filed suit within six months of receipt as permitted by section 736.1008(2). Further, the evidence did not clearly and convincingly show actual knowledge of the breach more than four years before filing.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether res judicata barred the 2012 action for breach of fiduciary duty.
  2. Whether laches barred the 2012 action.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (9)

  • W & W Lumber of Palm Beach, Inc. v. Town & Country Builders, Inc., 35 So. 3d 79 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)(applied)
  • Tyson v. Viacom, Inc., 890 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)(applied)
  • M.C.G. v. Hillsborough Cnty. Sch. Bd., 927 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)(applied)
  • Parker v. State Bd. of Educ. ex rel. Fla. State Univ., 865 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)(cited)
  • Inter-Active Servs., Inc. v. Heathrow Master Ass'n, 809 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)(cited)
  • Patten v. Winderman, 965 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)(applied)
  • State, Dep't of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Fraser, 673 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)(applied)
  • Nayee v. Nayee, 705 So. 2d 961 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)(cited)
  • Woodward v. Woodward, 872 So. 2d 913 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)(mentioned)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…