DeMaris v. Asti, s. 82-555
| Decision Date | 08 February 1983 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 82-555,82-559,s. 82-555 |
| Citation | 426 So.2d 1153 |
| Parties | Demetra DeMARIS, Appellant, v. Robert ASTI, Individually, and Blackwell, Walker, Gray, Powers, Flick and Hoehl, a partnership engaged in the practice of Law, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Don G. Nicholson, Miami, and Nancy Little Hoffman, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Kimbrell, Hamann, Jennings, Womack, Carlson & Kniskern and Joanne V. Kacin, Miami, for appellees.
Before BARKDULL, FERGUSON and JORGENSON, JJ.
This appeal is taken from a final judgment of the Circuit Court, General Jurisdiction Division, which dismissed appellant's complaint. The contentions here are that the court erred in (1) dismissing the complaint where no adequate remedy existed in probate and the complaint alleged a cause of action for legal malpractice based on negligence or breach of contract, and (2) denying plaintiff's motion for leave to amend her complaint where additional facts could be alleged to show that she had no adequate remedy in probate.
An attorney preparing a will has a duty not only to the testator-client, but also to the testator's intended beneficiaries, who may maintain a legal malpractice action against the attorney on theories of either tort (negligence) or contract (as third-party beneficiaries). McAbee v. Edwards, 340 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). However, liability to the testamentary beneficiary can arise only if, due to the attorney's professional negligence, the testamentary intent, as expressed in the will, is frustrated, and the beneficiary's legacy is lost or diminished as a direct result of that negligence. [e.s.] Ventura County Humane Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children and Animals, Inc. v. Holloway, 40 Cal.App.3d 897, 115 Cal.Rptr. 464 (1974). There is no authority--the reasons being obvious--for the proposition that a disappointed beneficiary may prove, by evidence totally extrinsic to the will, the testator's testamentary intent was other than as expressed in his solemn and properly executed will. 1
From the face of the Amended and Recast Complaint, which was dismissed, and the Proposed Second Amended Complaint, which we have also considered, it is clear that there is a deficiency which cannot be cured by amendment. See Affordable Homes, Inc. v. Devil's Run, Limited, 408 So.2d 679 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
Affirmed.
1 There is no challenge here to testamentary capacity. Further,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Barcelo v. Elliott
...Stowe v. Smith, 184 Conn. 194, 441 A.2d 81, 83 (1981); Needham v. Hamilton, 459 A.2d 1060, 1062 (D.C.1983); DeMaris v. Asti, 426 So.2d 1153, 1154 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); Ogle v. Fuiten, 102 Ill.2d 356, 80 Ill.Dec. 772, 774-75, 466 N.E.2d 224, 226-27 (1984); Walker v. Lawson, 526 N.E.2d 968,......
-
Mieras v. DeBona, Docket No. 100259
...his client-testator's directions to be maintained on the basis of testimony from disappointed beneficiaries. 26 In DeMaris v. Asti, 426 So.2d 1153, 1154 (Fla.App., 1983), a Florida appellate court There is no authority---the reasons being obvious---for the proposition that a disappointed be......
-
In re Sunrise Securities Litigation
...it was the apparent intent of the client to benefit a third party, such as in the preparation of a will. Id. See De Maris v. Asti, 426 So.2d 1153 (Fla.Dist.Ct. App.1983); cf. Guy v. Liederbach, 501 Pa. 47, 459 A.2d 744 (1983) (under Pennsylvania law, mere negligence of attorney toward someo......
-
Fabian v. Lindsay
...the will, is frustrated, and the beneficiary's legacy is lost or diminished as a direct result of that negligence.DeMaris v. Asti, 426 So.2d 1153, 1154 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983) (citations omitted); see also Schreiner v. Scoville, 410 N.W.2d 679, 683 (Iowa 1987) (“[W]e hold a cause of action o......
-
The Gambler Breaks Even: Legal Malpractice in Complicated Estate Planning Cases
...adhered to it. See, e.g., Lorraine v. Grover, Ciment, Weinstein & Stauber, 467 So. 2d 315 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985); DeMaris v. Asti, 426 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983); Schreiner v. Scoville, 410 N.W.2d 679 (Iowa 1987); see also Fogel, supra note 1, at 283. Colorado and Michigan a......
-
1-3 First Predicate: Attorney's Employment
...N.V., 512 So. 2d 192, 194 (Fla. 1987). See also McA-bee v. Edwards, 340 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 4th Dist. Ct. App. 1976); DeMaris v. Asti, 426 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 3d Dist. Ct. App. 1983); Lorraine v. Grover, Ciment, Weinstein & Stauber, P.A., 467 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 3d Dist. Ct. App. 1985); Rosenstone......
-
The Evolution of Legal Malpractice in Estate Planning in South Carolina
...(Md. 1998); Stowe v. Smith, 441 A.2d 81, 84 (Conn. 1981). [6] Fabian v. Lindsay, 410 S.C 475, 765 S.E.2d 132 (2014); DeMaris v. Asti, 426 So. 2d 1153, 1154 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983); Schreiner v. Scouille, 410 N.W.2d 679, 683 (Iowa 1987). [7] Rydde v. Morris, 381 S.C. 643, 646, 675 S.E.2d ......