Rubin on Probate Litigation

Rudolph v. Rosecan ,  154 So.3d 381  (Fla. 4th DCA 2014), 2014 WL 6674749 This decision deals with who is considered an "interested person" in a guardianship proceeding for purposes of objecting to a guardian's annual accounting.  Here, a father was appointed plenary guardian of his adult autistic son's person and property.  A parenting plan was incorporated into the order appointing the father as guardian, and that parenting plan provided for the father and mother to have shared decision making authority and information sharing rights with regard to their son.  It expressly provided that the father had ultimate authority to make decisions about his son's person, but did not address financial decisions. The father voluntarily provided the mother with copies of his annual guardianship accountings over the years, but eventually sought a court order declaring that the mother was not an interested person for purposes of the annual accounting.  The trial court

Minassian v. Rachins , 152 So.3d 719 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014), 2014 WL 6775269 This case turned on the ability of a trust protector to modify a trust instrument to effectuate the settlor's intent.  At the settlor's death, the trust at issue provided for a family trust for the benefit of the settlor's wife.  Upon the wife's death, the family trust terminated and the trust referred to the establishment of separate shares for the decedent's children.   The children filed a complaint against the wife, as trustee of the family trust, for breach of trust.  She responded by moving to dismiss their complaint because they lacked standing, since they were not beneficiaries of the family trust.  She took the position that upon her death, the family trust terminated, and new trusts were created, and thus the children were not beneficiaries of the family trust during her life.  The trial court disagreed, finding that the use of the word "shares" prevented the court