Post v. Central Bank & Trust Co.

403 So. 2d 1353, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21084
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedSeptember 15, 1981
DocketNos. 80-1782, 80-1783
StatusPublished

This text of 403 So. 2d 1353 (Post v. Central Bank & Trust Co.) 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
Post v. Central Bank & Trust Co., 403 So. 2d 1353, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21084 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

Opinion

BARKDULL, Judge.

Thomas R. Post appeals from an order of the circuit court, rejecting his offer to purchase property from the estate of Alberta Sawyer, deceased, and directing that the sale be made to the deceased’s son, William Sawyer, Jr.

The late Alberta Sawyer provided the following in her Will, among other things: appointment of co-executors, sale of real property. At the time of her death, she was possessed of certain real property located in the City of Miami. During the probate of the estate, the estate became in need of additional funds and the co-executors had a dispute as to whether to enter into a contract to sell the real property. The co-executor, Central Bank and Trust Company, filed a petition authorizing the sale of property wherein it sought the approval of the court to sell the property at a cash purchase price of $138,000.00, subject to a $14,000.00 brokerage commission payable to a brokerage firm, the principal of which was the son of the attorney for the Bank. The deceased’s son (and co-executor) objected to the sale and requested an opportunity to secure a higher bid which might include a bid from himself. Thereupon, the judge entered an order which read in part as follows:

“ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR APPROVAL OF SALE, GRANTING TIME FOR ADDITIONAL BIDS AND ESTABLISHING TIME FOR OPENING OF SEALED BIDS AND FOR APPROVAL OF SALE OF PROPERTY
THIS MATTER coming on upon the Petition of the Central Bank and Trust Company as Co-Personal Representative of this Estate for an Order authorizing the sale of four (4) parcels of real property owned by the Estate of the Deceased, and the Court finds that:
1. All interested parties have been served with proper notice of said hearing.
3. At the time of the hearing William Sawyer, Jr., on his own behalf, requested an opportunity to secure a higher bid than that previously secured by the Central Bank and Trust Company as Co-Personal Representative of the Estate, that he would secure a substantially higher bid for the said parcels of property, which [1355]*1355bid may include a bid from William Sawyer, Jr. himself.
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
That further argument on the said Petition heretofore filed in this cause is hereby postponed and adjudication thereon is postponed pending the attempt on the part of Co-Personal Representatives to secure additional bid or bids for the property based upon the following terms and conditions:
A. That any such bid shall be in the form of a formal Contract of Purchase and Sale executed by the prospective purchaser, accompanied by cash or cashier’s check in the amount of 10% of the total bid, made payable to the Co-Personal Representatives of the Estate of Alberta Sawyer, Deceased; that said bid shall be delivered to the Court in a sealed envelope to be opened by the Court at a hearing established for that purpose on the 12th day of August, 1980 at 10:00 A.M.
B. That the said bid shall be for all cash and shall provide that the premises be acquired in an “As Is” condition.
C. That in the event a substantially higher bid is not obtained and submitted to the Court at that time, the Court shall accept the offer as previously submitted to the Court.”

This order required the sealed bids to be submitted to the court, to be opened by the court at a time certain. At the time set for the opening of the bids, three sealed bids had been received: one from the son, William Sawyer, Jr., and two from Thomas R. Post. The trial court opened the three envelopes and they revealed the following bids:

$200,000.00 William Sawyer, Jr.
$200,100.00 Thomas R. Post
$15,000.00 above the highest bid. Thomas R. Post

The trial court announced, without showing the bids to those present, that the highest bid was from Thomas Post for $215,000.00 and entered an order authorizing a sale to Post for said amount. William Sawyer, Jr. then filed a petition to vacate the order authorizing the sale of the property to Post. Upon hearing on this later petition, the court vacated the sale authorization to Post, declared it null and void, and entered an order authorizing the sale of the property to William Sawyer, Jr., which reads in part as follows:

“2. By Order entered August 21, 1980, the Court has Vacated its Order entered August 20, 1980, which Order had accepted a bid by Mr. Thomas R. Post, submitted on August 12, 1980, as a bid for $215,000. That bid was found by the Court to be invalid and contrary to the letter and spirit1 of this Court’s July 16, 1980 Order Extending Time for Approval of Sale, Granting Time for Additional Bids and Establishing Time for Opening of Sealed Bids and for Approval of Sale of Property. Therefore, only two valid bids are before the Court: (1) the bid of Mr. Thomas R. Post for $200,100, and (2) the bid by Mr. William Sawyer, Jr. for $200,000.
3. Manifestly, Mr. Post’s bid is not substantially higher than Mr. Sawyer’s bid.
4. Article XI of the Deceased’s Will requires that Mr. Sawyer consent in writing to the sale of any real estate owned by the Estate, unless the Court orders that a sale be had ‘in order to obtain cash to meet obligations of the Estate . . ., reflecting the specific allocation of the [1356]*1356funds acquired by such sale . . .The Court finds that this manifests the Testator’s intent that her son have control over disposition of the real estate owned by the Estate, and that the exception to that control set forth in the Will does not warrant the Court’s accepting Mr. Post’s bid of $200,100 over Mr. Sawyer’s bid of $200,000.
5. Moreover, at the hearing the attorney for the remaining vested beneficiaries, William Barnett and Mary Elizabeth Barnett, waived any objection to the Court’s accepting Mr. Sawyer’s $200,000 bid over Mr.

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

Related

Flagler Finance Corp. v. Therrell
159 So. 868 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1934)
Ex Parte Keller
194 S.E. 15 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
403 So. 2d 1353, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21084, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/post-v-central-bank-trust-co-fladistctapp-1981.