King v. Citizens and Southern Nat. Bank of Atlanta, Ga., 58-740
Decision Date | 17 March 1960 |
Docket Number | No. 58-740,58-740 |
Parties | Beulah McCollum KING and Jackson L. King, as Executors of the Will of Rufus De Witt King, deceased, Appellants. v. CITIZENS AND SOUTHERN NATIONAL BANK OF ATLANTA, GA., as Trustee, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Wilson Trammell and G. C. Conner, Miami, for appellants.
Redfearn, Ferrell & Simon, Miami, for appellee.
The appellants, executors of the last will and testament of Rufus De Witt King, deceased, appeal from an order of distribution made by the county judges' court, Dade County, Florida.
This is the second appearance of this case in this court. In the prior appeal (Fla.App.1958, 103 So.2d 689, 692) this court affirmed a decision of the Circuit Court of Dade County, which, inter alia, said:
'It is therefore apparent, that the widow is entitled to the amount determined by the formula of fifty per cent (50%) of the adjusted gross estate totaling $344,697.73, which would not be reduced by any amounts or properties received by the widow outside the will * * *.'
and further held:
'It is apparent from the reading of the will that the legacy bequested to the widow is a general legacy and therefore is not entitled to share in the economic gain or loss of the assets during the course of the administration of the estate and is also not entitled to share in the income on the assets of said estate.'
The order of distribution, dated October, 1958, from which the present appeal is taken, recites in paragraph 2:
Based upon these facts, the county judge then proceeded to reduce by $34,261.74 the widow's pecuniary legacy, which had previously been determined on appeal to be $344,697.73. This deduction represented 50% of the difference between the amount owed by the widow in accordance with the partnership settlement agreement and the amount included in the gross taxable estate as a result of the Internal Revenue audit.
In fixing the valuation dates of property distributed to the widow in kind, the county judge used the date and market value as of the date of delivery under the order of distribution which was later revoked.
In determining the allowance of interest of the pecuniary legacy to the widow, the county judge applied § 731.22, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., which provides:
'From and after the time fixed by the county judge in an order of distribution, general legacies shall bear legal interest until paid.'
and found that this was not a proper case under said statute, facts and circumstances for the allowance of interest.
Appellants raise two principal points on appeal which are summarized as follows: (1) the county judge erred in reducing the bequest to the widow, as determined by the prior appeal; and (2) the county judge erred in refusing to allow interest on said legacy, and in doing so, abused the discretion vested in him under § 731.22, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.
The law of the case, as affirmed by this court in the prior appeal, settled the amount to which the widow was entitled at $344,697.73, which could not be reduced by any amounts or properties received by the widow dehors the will.
The general rule is that when an appellate court passes upon questions and remands ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Tollius v. Dutch Inns of America, Inc.
...became the law of the case. Higbee v. Housing Authority of Jacksonville, 143 Fla. 560, 197 So. 479; King v. Citizens and Southern National Bank of Atlanta, Ga., Fla.App.1960, 119 So.2d 67; Walker v. Atlantic Coastline Railroad Company, Fla.App.1960, 121 So.2d 713; Texaco, Inc. v. Parker, Ct......
-
Barrett v. Macdonald, 38250
...84 N.W. 332.8 Now increased to 4,782 shares by a subsequent stock split.9 Hart v. Burke (3 Cir.), 108 F.2d 82; King v. Citizens & Southern Nat. Bank (Fla.App.), 119 So.2d 67; In re James' Estate, Sur., 65 N.Y.S.2d 756; In re Simpson, 32 N.J.Super. 85, 107 A.2d 827.1 The opinion of Mr. Justi......
-
Wright v. State
...case can be applied only to questions actually or Impliedly presented to and decided by the reviewing court. King v. Citizens and Southern Nat. Bank, 119 So.2d 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960). Obiter dictum is language quoted in an opinion which is not essential to a decision of the case. Pell v. Sta......
-
Bynum v. Sharpe
...contemporaneous with the date such assets are distributed. This is consistent with the general law of the land. See King v. C & S National Bank, 119 So.2d 67 (Fla.App.1960); In re Kantner, 50 N.J.Super. 582, 143 A.2d 243 (1958); In re Umpleby's Will, 43 Misc.2d 932, 252 N.Y.S.2d 674 (1964);......