Sanchez v. Sanchez De Davila
| Decision Date | 04 April 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-101,88-101 |
| Citation | 547 So.2d 943,14 Fla. L. Weekly 846 |
| Parties | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 846 Mario Mack SANCHEZ and Mario Jose Sanchez, Appellants, v. Zary Maria SANCHEZ DE DAVILA, Maliano Ramon Sanchez Franco, Luris Sanchez Gago, Mario Jose Sanchez Castillo, Zaida De Jesus Sanchez De Gonzalez, Irama Maria Sanchez Graffe De Arredondo, Omaida Maria Sanchez Gago, Osiris De Jesus Sanchez De Hernandez, Maria Conception Sanchez Cedeno, Mario Rafael Sanchez Blanco, Rogelia Maria Sanchez Vargas and Olga Maria Sanchez Gonzalez and Abner Solomon, as personal representatives of the estate of Mario Sanchez, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Steel, Hector & Davis and W. Peter Burns and F. Clay Craig and Robert W. Goldman, Miami, for appellants.
Cesar R. Camacho, Horton, Perse & Ginsberg and Mallory Horton, George J. Shamas, Miami, for appellees.
Before HUBBART, NESBITT and LEVY, * JJ.
This is an appeal from a final summary judgment which orders, in accord with Venezuelan law, that the funds of certain Totten trust bank accounts be turned over to the personal representative of the estate of the decedent who created the subject bank accounts, rather than to the surviving beneficiaries of the subject accounts in accord with Florida law. This judgment was entered below in ancillary probate proceedings brought by twelve of the putative children of the decedent. The beneficiaries of the Totten trust bank accounts appeal, and, for the reasons discussed below, we agree with their position that Florida law controls and reverse.
The relevant facts of this case are undisputed. The decedent, Mario Sanchez, was a Venezuelan national. Beginning in 1979, he visited the United States and opened a series of Totten trust bank accounts totaling approximately $2,000,000 with the Chase Manhattan Bank, in Miami, Florida. The accounts were opened in the name of Mario Sanchez "in trust for" two of his sons, Mario Jose Sanchez Santamaria and Mario Mack Sanchez Santamaria. In 1983, the decedent died intestate in Venezuela. Following his death, his two aforementioned sons, as beneficiaries, converted the Totten trust accounts into separate accounts in their own names at the Chase Manhattan Bank. Meanwhile, twelve other putative children of Sanchez made a "forced heirship" claim in the probate of Sanchez' estate in Venezuela in which they asserted a right to share in the Totten trust bank accounts in Miami. It is undisputed that under Venezuelan law these children, along with the two aforementioned sons, were entitled to a pro rata share of these accounts.
Ancillary probate proceedings were, accordingly, instituted by the twelve children in the circuit court below. A curator was appointed for the claimed Dade County assets of the estate, and a temporary injunction was issued freezing the funds from the Totten trust accounts. On appeal, this court affirmed the injunction noting that "[t]he trial court has yet to resolve the underlying dispute" between the parties as to whether the funds of the Totten trusts were to be distributed to the two sons as the surviving account beneficiaries under Florida law or equally among all of the fourteen children under Venezuelan law. Sanchez v. Soloman, 508 So.2d 1264 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Upon remand, the trial court ruled in the summary judgment under review that Venezuelan law controlled, that all of the children of the decedent were entitled to equal shares in the Totten trust accounts, and that the Chase Manhattan Bank should turn over the funds on deposit to the estate's personal representative. The two sons, who were the named beneficiaries of the Totten trusts, appeal.
Contrary to the trial court's ruling, we conclude that Florida law, not Venezuelan law, controls the disposition of the Totten trust accounts in this case, and that, accordingly, the two sons who have brought this appeal are entitled to the proceeds of the accounts under Florida law because they are the named beneficiaries of the accounts. We reach this result based on the following briefly stated legal analysis.
It is well settled in Florida that the disposition of a joint bank account, including a Totten trust, is governed by the law of the situs of the account regardless of the domicile of any party to the account. Seng v. Corns, 58 So.2d 686, 687 (Fla.1952); Lieberman v. Silverstein, 393 So.2d 565, 566 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). 1 Section 655.55, Florida Statutes (Supp.1988), codifies this choice of law rule as to bank accounts located in Florida:
"The law of this state ... shall govern all aspects, including without limitation the validity and effect, of any deposit account in a branch or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nahar v. Nahar
...Restatement (Second), Conflict of Laws, Sec. 98 (1988). See also Sec. 732.702, Fla.Stat. (1991). But see Sanchez v. Sanchez De Davila, 547 So.2d 943 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 554 So.2d 1168 (Fla.1989) (distinguishable due to the antenuptial agreement between deceased and his future wife......
-
Neto v. Thorner
...aff'd mem., 56 N.Y.2d 973, 439 N.E.2d 341, 453 N.Y.S.2d 625 (1982); cf. also N.Y.Est. Powers & Trusts Law § 3-5.1(h); Sanchez v. de Davila, 547 So.2d 943 (Fla.Ct.App.1989). New York law should therefore determine the trust's Matter of Senft involved facts similar to the ones in this case, a......
-
Pastor v. Union Central Life Ins. Co.
...law lex loci contractus rule. In comparison, the legislature made such an intent clear in the statute at issue in Sanchez v. Sanchez De Davila, 547 So.2d 943 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). In Sanchez, the court held that the statute under review codified the applicable choice of law rule because it st......
-
Florio v. Florio
... ... Fla. Stat. Ann. § 655.55 (West 1992).7 See Sanchez v. Sanchez De Davila, ... 547 So.2d 943, 945 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1989) (it is "well settled" in ... ...
-
Are title disputes probate creditor “claims”?
...title to the same had been placed in Decedent’s name for his convenience.” Id. at 1251. Billy also cites to Sanchez v. Sanchez De Davila, 547 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1989), in which the parties claimed injunctive relief to enjoin distribution of funds. Id. at 944. The probate claim involve......