Summary
The Supreme Court of Florida held that Florida's homestead protections against creditors may pass by will to a devisee when the decedent has no surviving spouse or minor children. The court interpreted “heirs” to include any person within the class of potential heirs identified by the intestacy statute, rather than only those who would actually inherit if the decedent had died intestate. Accordingly, the court quashed the Second District Court of Appeal's decision and held that the granddaughter's devise of the homestead retained constitutional creditor protection.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Florida's constitutional homestead protection against forced sale by creditors can pass to a devisee under a will when the decedent has no surviving spouse or minor children.
- Whether the protection can pass to a lineal descendant who falls within the class of persons identified in Florida's intestacy statutes but who would not have been the actual intestate taker because a closer descendant survived.
Holdings
- When a decedent has no surviving spouse or minor children, the constitutional protection against forced sale by creditors may inure to the person to whom the homestead is devised by will.
- The homestead protection may be devised to any family member within the class of persons categorized in Florida's intestacy statute, even if that person would not have actually inherited under intestacy because a closer descendant survived.
- A testator may not expect the homestead's constitutional protection against creditors to survive a devise to a person who is not categorized within Florida's intestacy statute.
Key quotations
“Instead, we hold that the constitution must be construed to mean that a testator, when drafting a will prior to death, may devise the homestead (if there is no surviving spouse or minor children) to any of that class of persons categorized in section 732.103 (the intestacy statute).” (at 1000)
“In the context of this case, we reject the narrow entitlement definition of the term "heirs" that includes only those people who would inherit under the intestacy statute at the death of the decedent.” (at 1006)
“Instead, we hold that the homestead provision allows a testator with no surviving spouse or minor children to choose to devise, in a will, the homestead property, with its accompanying protection from creditors, to any family member within the class of persons categorized in our intestacy statute.” (at 1006)
Factual background
Betty Snyder died testate on February 15, 1995, without a surviving spouse or minor children. Her will devised the residue of her estate, including her homestead, to her adult granddaughter, Kelli Snyder; Betty's adult son, Milo Snyder, survived her. The personal representative sought to sell the homestead to satisfy creditors, specific bequests, and administration expenses, while Kelli claimed that the homestead passed to her protected from creditors under article X, section 4, of the Florida Constitution.
Procedural history
Betty Snyder's personal representative sought to sell homestead property to satisfy creditors' claims, specific bequests, and estate-administration costs. The trial court held that the homestead exemption protected the property after it was devised to Betty's granddaughter, Kelli Snyder. The Second District reversed, concluding that Kelli was not an heir because her father, who would have inherited under intestacy, survived Betty. The Supreme Court of Florida accepted review, answered the certified question affirmatively, quashed the district court's decision, and approved Walker v. Mickler.