Michaels v. Dillon
Decision Date | 21 October 1966 |
Docket Number | No. 7221,7221 |
Citation | 191 So.2d 80 |
Parties | Mary MICHAELS, Appellant, v. Carrol F. DILLON, as Executor of the Estate of Joseph G. Nimer, deceased, Appellee. . Second District |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
John L. Early, of Early & Early, Sarasota, for appellant.
Carrol F. Dillon, Sarasota, for appellee.
Mary Michaels has appealed from a judgment of contempt for her refusal to deliver a 1961 Buick automobile to the executor of the Estate of Joseph G. Nimer.
The executor petitioned for Rule to Show Cause why appellant has failed and refused to deliver the automobile allegedly owned by decedent at his death. After the rule was issued, appellant, who is a stranger to the estate, filed a motion to dismiss asserting that the probate court had no jurisdiction over the subject matter, and also filed an answer setting up an alleged agreement with the decedent for her purchase of the car.
The substance of the alleged agreement is that appellant was to pay $250.00 cash and receive possession of the automobile and withhold $345.00 of the $595.00 purchase price until the title certificate was transferred to her in her name. Appellant claims she can demonstrate that she paid $250.00 from her own funds and that she is ready and willing to pay the $345.00 balance.
After hearing on the rule, the court found, (1) that the automobile was inventoried as an asset of the estate With title to the car in the name of the decedent, (2) that appellant has possession of the automobile, ability to turn it over to the executor, and has failed to do so, and (3) that appellant is in contempt of court for her failure and refusal to deliver the automobile to the executor. The court then ordered the appellant to be held in custody of the sheriff until she purged herself of contempt by delivering the automobile to the executor.
On appeal, appellant argues, in effect, that the county judge did not have jurisdiction to try title, as between the estate and a stranger, of personal property valued over $100.00.
A county judge's jurisdiction in cases where title to personal property is in issue is tainted with uncertainty. In Re Brown's Estate, Fla.App.1961, 134 So.2d 290. This uncertainty results from the broad terms used in the constitution and by the Legislature that the jurisdictional grant is 'to discharge the duties usually pertaining to courts of probate.' Act. V, Section 7, Fla.Const., Fla.Stats. F.S.A. See also Sections 732.01, and 36.01(3), Fla.Stats. F.S.A.
The Court in In Re Brown's Estate, supra, summarized some of the broad principles that assist in reducing this jurisdictional uncertainty:
* * *'134 So.2d 290 at page 293.
In addition, the county judge has no jurisdiction to determine...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
In re Collins
...Corporation v. Woolverton, 99 So.2d 286 (Fla.1957); Fischer v. Bennard's Surf, 217 So.2d 576 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969); Michaels v. Dillon, 191 So.2d 80 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966). These cases are not applicable for two reasons. First, the item here involved is a boat rather than a motor vehicle and the ......
-
Constant v. Tillitson
...CARROLL, DONALD K., and SPECTOR, JJ., concur. 1 F.S. § 689.15, F.S.A.2 Tingle v. Hornsby (Fla.App.1959), 111 So.2d 274.3 Michaels v. Dillon (Fla.App.1966), 191 So.2d 80; In Re Brown's Estate (Fla.App.1961), 134 So.2d 290; In Re Lawrence's Estate (Fla.1950), 45 So.2d 344.4 Rule 1.540, R.C.P.......
-
Young's Estate, In re
...upon them by the constitution and statutes and such as may be incidentally necessary to the execution of such powers. Michaels v. Dillon, Fla.App.1966, 191 So.2d 80; In re Donaldson's Estate, Fla.App.1962, 147 So.2d 552; In Re Guardianship of White, Fla.App.1962, 140 So.2d 311. A county jud......