Sine v. Davidson

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sine v. Davidson

530 So. 2d 506, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2091, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3963, 1988 WL 91186

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 6, 1988

DocketNo. 88-319

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 530 So. 2d 506 (Sine v. Davidson) 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

Sine v. Davidson, 530 So. 2d 506, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2091, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3963, 1988 WL 91186 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the trial court’s order appointing an administrator ad litem to investigate and contest, if necessary, a will already admitted to probate. No jeopardy to [507]*507the estate has been demonstrated by any person with standing. More important, however, is the fact that the trial court’s order imposes a duty beyond those authorized by law. See In re Lewis’ Estate, 411 So.2d 368 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Woolf v. Reed, 389 So.2d 1026 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).

It also appears that the trial court’s order denying summary judgment does not accurately reflect the court’s ruling that the will contestants lacked standing and should be corrected by entry of an order granting summary judgment.

REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the trial court’s order appointing an administrator ad litem to investigate and contest, if necessary, a will already admitted to probate. No jeopardy to [507]*507the estate has been demonstrated by any person with standing. More important, however, is the fact that the trial court’s order imposes a duty beyond those authorized by law. See In re Lewis’ Estate, 411 So.2d 368 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Woolf v. Reed, 389 So.2d 1026 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).

It also appears that the trial court’s order denying summary judgment does not accurately reflect the court’s ruling that the will contestants lacked standing and should be corrected by entry of an order granting summary judgment.

REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

530 So. 2d 506, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2091, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3963, 1988 WL 91186, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sine-v-davidson-fladistctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack