Litzky's Estate, In re, 73-1182

Decision Date28 May 1974
Docket NumberNo. 73-1182,73-1182
Citation296 So.2d 638
PartiesIn re the ESTATE of Isaac LITZKY, Deceased. Rose Zyontz LITZKY, Appellant, v. Howard F. ULLMAN, Administrator for the Estate of Isaac Litzky, Deceased, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Steven M. Roth, Miami, for appellant.

Lewis S. Kimler, Miami Beach, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, HENDRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

HENDRY, Judge.

Appellant seeks review of a final judgment of the probate division of the circuit court determining that she is not the legal widow of the decedent and therefore is not entitled to take her statutory dower interest in his estate.

Briefly, the relevant facts before the probate judge revealed that the appellant, Rose Litzky, a/k/a Rose Zyontz, ceremonially married the decedent, Isaac Litzky, on May 13, 1971. The marriage ceremony was performed by an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, Louis Blaustein, in accordance with the rules and traditions of the Orthodox Jewish faith. The couple was issued a 'Ksuba,' a Hebrew marriage certificate, by Rabbi Blaustein. However, no marriage license was obtained in accordance with the provisions of Ch. 741, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. On October 1, 1971, Isaac Litzky died intestate, and the appellant filed her notice of election to take dower.

The appellant testified by the deposition that the mailbox at the apartment where she and the decedent resided after the ceremonial marriage contained the names, 'Mr. and Mrs. Isaac Litzky and Rose Zyontz.' In addition, she testified that she continued to accept full Social Security benefits provided her as the widow of her deceased husband, Nathan Zyontz, while she lived with the decedent. She continued to accept these benefits under the name of Zyontz even after Isaac Litzky's death.

Based on this evidence, the court entered a finding that Fla.Stat. § 741.211 F.S.A. invalidated common-law marriages entered into after January 1, 1968 and that the wording of the statute does not indicate any legislative intention to distinguish a religious or ceremonial marriage from a common-law marriage. The court further rendered its interpretation of Section 741.211 as invalidating all marriages which are not entered into by the parties in good faith and in substantial compliance with the laws pertaining to marriage.

We have carefully considered all points raised by the appellant in her brief, as well as the arguments of counsel, in light of the record and the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Roberts v. Opalich
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • December 21, 2023
    ... ... insurance ... The parties separated on May 1, 2020 ... Husband purchased the real estate located at 4979 Countryside ... Road, Lyndhurst, Ohio, in 2009, and it had a current value of ... ...
  • Estate of Accardi, 73-1318
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 28, 1974

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT