Batterson v. Elliott

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Batterson v. Elliott

188 So. 3d 882, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 174, 2016 WL 66700

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 6, 2016

Docket2D14-3260

StatusPublished

This text of 188 So. 3d 882 (Batterson v. Elliott) 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

Batterson v. Elliott, 188 So. 3d 882, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 174, 2016 WL 66700 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

CASANUEVA, Judge.

James Batterson and Pamela Armstrong challenge an order removing Pamela Armstrong as trustee of the Sonya M. Hawley Revocable Trust dated December 6, 2013, and removing her as limited guardian of the person of Sonya M. Hawley. We conclude that the trial court had the authority to enter the order pursuant to section 744.1075(4)(b), Florida Statutes (2013), where it found that such action was necessary to • protect the physical or mental health or property of Ms. Hawley. However, upon entering this order, the trial *883 court was required to comply with section 744.1075(4)(a), which provides as follows:

If the court finds probable cause, the court shall issue an order to show cause directed to the guardian or other respondent stating the essential facts constituting the conduct charged and requiring the respondent to appear before the court to show cause why the court should not take further action.

We therefore remand this case for the trial court to conduct further proceedings consistent with section 744.1075(4)(a). We note that on remand, the order to show cause must “specify the time and place of the hearing with a reasonable time to allow for the preparation of a defense after service of the order.” 1 See id.

Affirmed; cause, remanded with directions.

SILBERMAN and SLEET, JJ„ Concur.

1

. The parties are cautioned against engaging in protracted unnecessary litigation at the ward’s expense.

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

CASANUEVA, Judge.

James Batterson and Pamela Armstrong challenge an order removing Pamela Armstrong as trustee of the Sonya M. Hawley Revocable Trust dated December 6, 2013, and removing her as limited guardian of the person of Sonya M. Hawley. We conclude that the trial court had the authority to enter the order pursuant to section 744.1075(4)(b), Florida Statutes (2013), where it found that such action was necessary to • protect the physical or mental health or property of Ms. Hawley. However, upon entering this order, the trial *883 court was required to comply with section 744.1075(4)(a), which provides as follows:

If the court finds probable cause, the court shall issue an order to show cause directed to the guardian or other respondent stating the essential facts constituting the conduct charged and requiring the respondent to appear before the court to show cause why the court should not take further action.

We therefore remand this case for the trial court to conduct further proceedings consistent with section 744.1075(4)(a). We note that on remand, the order to show cause must “specify the time and place of the hearing with a reasonable time to allow for the preparation of a defense after service of the order.” 1 See id.

Affirmed; cause, remanded with directions.

SILBERMAN and SLEET, JJ„ Concur.

1

. The parties are cautioned against engaging in protracted unnecessary litigation at the ward’s expense.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 So. 3d 882, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 174, 2016 WL 66700, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/batterson-v-elliott-fladistctapp-2016.