Barron v. Estate of Barron

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Barron v. Estate of Barron

510 So. 2d 373, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1864, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9629

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 31, 1987

DocketNo. 86-3276

StatusPublished

This text of 510 So. 2d 373 (Barron v. Estate of Barron) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barron v. Estate of Barron, 510 So. 2d 373, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1864, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9629 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

RYDER, Judge.

Appellant, Paul Barron, appeals from the trial court’s denial of his petition to reopen probate proceedings and to rescind adjudication of death. The trial court denied the petition “in its entirety,” but then found that “Barron is in fact alive_” In order to give effect to the apparent intent of the trial court’s order, we construe the order as granting the petition insofar as to rescinding the earlier adjudication of death, but denying the petition to reopen probate proceedings. We find no merit in the issues raised by appellant in this appeal other than that discussed above. Accordingly, [374]*374we affirm based on the above construction of the trial court’s order.

Affirmed.

SCHEB, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

RYDER, Judge.

Appellant, Paul Barron, appeals from the trial court’s denial of his petition to reopen probate proceedings and to rescind adjudication of death. The trial court denied the petition “in its entirety,” but then found that “Barron is in fact alive_” In order to give effect to the apparent intent of the trial court’s order, we construe the order as granting the petition insofar as to rescinding the earlier adjudication of death, but denying the petition to reopen probate proceedings. We find no merit in the issues raised by appellant in this appeal other than that discussed above. Accordingly, [374]*374we affirm based on the above construction of the trial court’s order.

Affirmed.

SCHEB, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

510 So. 2d 373, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1864, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barron-v-estate-of-barron-fladistctapp-1987.