In re Estate of Parris Jerrido

Summary

The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reviewed consolidated appeals arising from the administration of Parris Jerrido’s estate. The court affirmed orders recognizing five children as heirs, concluding that testimony regarding nonaccess was admissible and that life-insurance applications constituted sufficient written acknowledgments of paternity under former section 731.29, Florida Statutes. It also dismissed as untimely the cross-appeal challenging Ruth Jerrido’s status as the decedent’s common-law widow.

Holdings

1. An order adjudicating a claimant's status relative to an estate is a final order subject to plenary appeal; therefore, the cross-appellants' attempt to challenge the March 30, 1973 widow-status determination in the later appeal was untimely.
2. In light of Gammon v. Cobb, testimony by a woman married to one man when her children were born concerning that husband's non-access was admissible to support a claim that another man was the children's father.
3. Illegitimate children are entitled to inherit from their father when the remaining proof satisfies former section 731.29, Florida Statutes (1974), including its written-acknowledgment requirement.
4. Life-insurance applications incorporated into policies upon acceptance became part of those policies and were prima facie evidence of their own authenticity, including the signatures of witnesses; absent evidence that the decedent did not sign them, they adequately supported the paternity determination.
5. The order allowing payment of $1,528.80 in administration expenses for a transcript of testimony and an appraiser's fee was affirmed because appellant's contentions lacked merit.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the probate court's March 30, 1973 order determining Ruth Jerrido's status as the decedent's widow was a final order subject to plenary appeal, making the later cross-appeal untimely.
2. Whether the children's mother was competent to testify about her husband's non-access to establish that the three children born or conceived during her marriage were the decedent's children.
3. Whether the five children satisfied the statutory requirements for illegitimate children to inherit from their father under former section 731.29, Florida Statutes (1974).
4. Whether photocopies of life-insurance applications incorporated into issued policies could constitute prima facie evidence of authenticity and written acknowledgment of paternity without eyewitness testimony.
5. Whether the probate court properly allowed the challenged administration expenses.

Disposition

other