Zimmerman v. Siegel

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Zimmerman v. Siegel

710 So. 2d 755, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5925, 1998 WL 264120

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 27, 1998

DocketNo. 97-2948

StatusPublished

This text of 710 So. 2d 755 (Zimmerman v. Siegel) 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

Zimmerman v. Siegel, 710 So. 2d 755, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5925, 1998 WL 264120 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals the trial judge’s adverse ruling on his petition for declaratory relief concerning the interpretation of a trust agreement. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s refusal to allow Appellant to amend his complaint. However, the trial court did make a mathematical error by awarding Appellant only a 2.5% interest in the corpus of the trust rather than a 5% interest. Under the trust agreement, Lee Levrey was entitled to a 5% share of the corpus per year, and the corpus of the trust consisted of a 50% interest in a country club. Thus, Levrey was entitled to a 2.5% interest per year in the country club as a whole, but a 5% interest in the corpus of the trust. We, thus, reverse and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

STONE, C.J., and FARMER and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals the trial judge’s adverse ruling on his petition for declaratory relief concerning the interpretation of a trust agreement. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s refusal to allow Appellant to amend his complaint. However, the trial court did make a mathematical error by awarding Appellant only a 2.5% interest in the corpus of the trust rather than a 5% interest. Under the trust agreement, Lee Levrey was entitled to a 5% share of the corpus per year, and the corpus of the trust consisted of a 50% interest in a country club. Thus, Levrey was entitled to a 2.5% interest per year in the country club as a whole, but a 5% interest in the corpus of the trust. We, thus, reverse and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

STONE, C.J., and FARMER and GROSS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

710 So. 2d 755, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5925, 1998 WL 264120, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zimmerman-v-siegel-fladistctapp-1998.