Summary
The Florida Second District Court of Appeal held that an undue influence claim challenging the validity of an irrevocable trust is an action “founded upon fraud” for statute of limitations purposes, thereby invoking the delayed discovery doctrine under Fla. Stat. § 95.031(2)(a). The four-year limitations period therefore runs from the time the facts giving rise to the claim were discovered or should have been discovered, not from the date the trust became irrevocable. The court reversed the dismissal of the complaint as untimely and remanded for further proceedings.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether an undue influence claim challenging an irrevocable trust is subject to the delayed discovery doctrine under section 95.031(2)(a), Florida Statutes.
Holdings
- An undue influence claim challenging a trust may be subject to the delayed discovery provisions of section 95.031(2)(a), Florida Statutes, because undue influence is treated as a species of fraud, and the statute's language 'founded upon fraud' encompasses a broader class of claims than merely actions alleging fraud in general.
Key quotations
“An action founded upon fraud under s. 95.11(3), including constructive fraud, must be begun within the period prescribed in this chapter, with the period running from the time the facts giving rise to the cause of action were discovered or should have been discovered with the exercise of due diligence, instead of running from any date prescribed elsewhere in s. 95.11(3), but in any event an action for fraud under s. 95.11(3) must be begun within 12 years after the date of the commission of the alleged fraud, regardless of the date the fraud was or should have been discovered.” (962)
“But the uses of the prepositions 'founded upon fraud' and 'founded on fraud' in sections 95.031(2)(a) and 95.011(3)(j), respectively, plainly countenance a broader class of claims than merely actions alleging fraud in general.” (962)
Factual background
Flanzer's parents settled assets into a philanthropic trust in December 2005, which became irrevocable at its creation. Her father died in June 2013, and her mother died in March 2015. Flanzer alleged that from at least 2001 until her mother's death, the trustees exploited a confidential relationship with her mother, who had diminished mental capacity, to unduly influence her and eliminate Flanzer from her estate plan. Flanzer sought to revoke the trust based on undue influence.
Procedural history
Jan Flanzer sued the trustees of her parents' philanthropic trust, alleging undue influence. The circuit court dismissed Count V of the complaint with prejudice, agreeing with the trustees that the statute of limitations barred the claim because the trust became irrevocable in 2005. Flanzer appealed.
Remand instructions
Remand for further proceedings on Count V, as the claim may be subject to delayed discovery under section 95.031(2)(a), provided Flanzer satisfies the section's requirements.