Zulon v. Peckins
Opinion
ON MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
We grant the appellee’s motion for clarification, withdraw this court’s previous opinion dated February 8, 2012, and issue this opinion in its stead.
The appellant, Elizabeth Zulon, appeals from an order of the probate court removing her as co-personal representative of her father’s estate. Because removal was ordered without notice or an evidentiary hearing, “the ruling did not meet even the most rudimentary requirements of due process.” LoCascio v. Estate of LoCascio, 78 So.3d 573, 574 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011). We reverse and remand with instructions to reinstate the co-personal representatives;1 discharge Mr. Peckins as successor personal representative; and conduct a duly noticed evidentiary hearing regarding the [648]*648removal of Elizabeth Zulon and Ana Zu-lon as co-personal representatives.2
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
81 So. 3d 647 (Zulon v. Peckins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.