In re Estate of Reid

District Court of Appeal of Florida

In re Estate of Reid

182 So. 2d 54

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 18, 1966

DocketNo. 65-462

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 182 So. 2d 54 (In re Estate of Reid) 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 Reid, 182 So. 2d 54 (Fla. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order allowing fees to the named executor and his attorneys for services rendered in the probate and will contest proceedings concerning a will which was held to be void because of undue influence. See In re Reid’s Estate, Fla.App.1962, 138 So.2d 342. The appellant — the sole beneficiary of a second will, which was admitted to probate— contends that the award of fees was not authorized. This contention is without merit. See Watts v. Newport, 151 Fla. 209, 9 So.2d 417 (1942); In re Graham’s Estate, 156 Fla. 421, 23 So.2d 485 (1945); and Williams v. Kane, Fla.1956, 88 So.2d 603. Inasmuch as the record does not reveal that the lower court abused its discretion in awarding the fees herein, the order appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order allowing fees to the named executor and his attorneys for services rendered in the probate and will contest proceedings concerning a will which was held to be void because of undue influence. See In re Reid’s Estate, Fla.App.1962, 138 So.2d 342. The appellant — the sole beneficiary of a second will, which was admitted to probate— contends that the award of fees was not authorized. This contention is without merit. See Watts v. Newport, 151 Fla. 209, 9 So.2d 417 (1942); In re Graham’s Estate, 156 Fla. 421, 23 So.2d 485 (1945); and Williams v. Kane, Fla.1956, 88 So.2d 603. Inasmuch as the record does not reveal that the lower court abused its discretion in awarding the fees herein, the order appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 So. 2d 54, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estate-of-reid-fladistctapp-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack