Karr v. Vitry
This text of 135 So. 3d 372 (Karr v. Vitry) 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.
Opinion
In this guardianship case, Susan Karr, guardian of the person and property of her aunt, Nettie Pearson (“the ward”), appeals two orders — one denying her motion for discharge and one denying her motion for guardian fees. This court has jurisdiction.1 We affirm as to the order denying the motion for guardian fees and as to most aspects of the order denying discharge. However, we reverse as to the trial court’s ruling that two Florida bank accounts and a Tennessee credit union account were solely owned by the ward.
At the evidentiary hearing held below, Karr established that all three accounts were titled in both her name and the ward’s name at the time of the ward’s death. As argued by Karr, this gave rise to a presumption of survivorship in her favor by virtue of section 655.79, Florida Statutes (2012).2 Because there was no evidence presented to overcome the statutory presumption, the trial court erred in determining that the funds in these accounts belonged to the ward’s estate. The funds belong to Karr. We reverse that part of the trial court’s order addressing this issue, and affirm in all other respects. On remand, the trial court is directed to close the guardianship in a fashion consistent with this opinion.
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
135 So. 3d 372, 2014 WL 258753, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 742, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/karr-v-vitry-fladistctapp-2014.