In Re Estate of Feldstein

292 So. 2d 404, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 7760
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 2, 1974
Docket73-943
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 292 So. 2d 404 (In Re Estate of Feldstein) 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
In Re Estate of Feldstein, 292 So. 2d 404, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 7760 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

Opinion

292 So.2d 404 (1974)

In re ESTATE OF Morris FELDSTEIN, Deceased.

No. 73-943.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 2, 1974.

Pelzner & Schwedock, Miami, for appellant.

Harold Tannen, Miami, for appellees.

Before BARKDULL, C.J., and HENDRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

HENDRY, Judge.

This is an appeal by the executrix and trustee under the will from an order surcharging her $8,225 for failure to rent the decedent's condominium for four years. We affirm.

Appellant argues that the testator intended to absolve her of any honest errors of judgment as his personal representative particularly emphasizing paragraph Seventh of the will.

However, this paragraph only relieves appellant from liability for postponing the sale of any of the decedent's real property. It does not pertain to rental of the property while it is held.

Appellant as executrix and trustee is bound by Fla. Stat. §§ 518.10 and 518.11, F.S.A., the "prudent man rule." In our view, the probate judge was justified in imposing a surcharge where appellant has neglected her duty to obtain income for the estate, which in this case would have benefited beneficiaries under the testamentary trust created by the decedent's will.

We also see little merit to appellant's contention that the trust beneficiaries had no standing to bring the instant proceeding. See Rule 5.140, Probate and Guardian Rules. Even if the beneficiaries lacked standing the court on its own motion may require an accounting or evidence concerning the estate assets from the personal representative. Fla. Stat. §§ 733.50 and 733.51, F.S.A.

Therefore, for the reasons stated, the order appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Sun Bank and Trust Co. v. Jones
645 So. 2d 1008 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
In Re Guardianship of Medley
573 So. 2d 892 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
McGinnis v. Kanevsky
564 So. 2d 1141 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Estate of Conger v. Conger
414 So. 2d 230 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Beck v. Beck
383 So. 2d 268 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
292 So. 2d 404, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 7760, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estate-of-feldstein-fladistctapp-1974.