1-561-514-0900 FREE CONSULTATION

It is difficult, but not impossible, to have your district court appellate opinion reviewed and overturned by the Supreme Court of Florida

Uncategorized Apr 13, 2017
post about It is difficult, but not impossible, to have your district court appellate opinion reviewed and overturned by the Supreme Court of Florida

Supreme Court of Florida takes jurisdiction to address standards of review in marital, civil, and trust cases involving “donative intent,” and overturns Fourth District’s decision in a marital case in the process.

Donative intent” means a person’s intention to make a gift. The existence of “donative intent,” especially the existence of “donative intent” by a grantor or settlor, is frequently litigated in civil, marital, and trust cases.

In the marital dissolution case of Hooker v. Hooker, No. SC15-1881 (Fla. Mar. 30, 2017), the trial court found after a bench trial that the Former Husband had intended to share ownership of two pieces of property, titled solely in his name, with the Former Wife. This rendered the properties marital in character, and subject to equitable distribution by the trial judge. On appeal to the Fourth District, however, the Former Husband argued that he did not have donative intent. A three-judge panel of the Fourth District agreed in part. The Fourth District reversed and held that under the “preponderance of the credible evidence,” the Former Wife had not established a gift as to one of the properties (which had been the marital home). The Fourth District remanded for a new equitable distribution by the trial court, in accordance with its ruling. It denied rehearing.

This would be the end of the road for most litigants. Only in narrow circumstances is it possible to obtain further review of a district court of appeal opinion in the Supreme Court of Florida. One such instance is when the decision of the district court expressly and directly conflicts with a decision of another district court or of the Supreme Court itself on a point of law.

To obtain further review, appellate attorney Robert J. Hauser of Pankauski Hauser PLLC filed a notice to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Florida. Mr. Hauser contended that the Fourth District had applied the wrong standard of review of a finding of “donative intent” when reviewing the dissolution judgment. In doing so, it created express and direct conflict with prior district court and supreme court decisions. Naturally, the Former Husband disagreed, claiming that there was no error and no conflict with existing case law.

The Supreme Court found that conflict existed and accepted jurisdiction of the case. The parties filed briefs on the merits of the case. Mr. Hauser argued the case before the Supreme Court of Florida in Tallahassee on November 1, 2016.

On Thursday, March 30, 2017, the Supreme Court issued its decision. By a vote of 6-0, the Justices quashed the decision of the Fourth District and reinstated the trial court’s equitable distribution scheme. The Court reinstated the trial court’s determination that there had been a gift of the marital residence, converting it to marital property. As a result of the Supreme Court’s decision, the parties’ final judgment of dissolution stands.

Justice Pariente authored an opinion on behalf of three of the six participating Justices. Justice Pariente explained that a litigant may establish a settlor or grantor’s donative intent at trial by the “preponderance of the credible evidence.” But once a trial court has made a finding of fact as to the existence of donative intent, the standard of review applied at the appellate court is quite different. Appellate courts examine a trial court’s finding of fact for “competent substantial evidence” that supports it. Appellate courts do not re-weigh evidence or decide what is sufficient to constitute a “preponderance of the credible evidence.” Trial judges, not appellate judges, are tasked with weighing evidence and deciding questions of credibility.

The Hooker decision demonstrates that an adverse district court decision is not necessarily insurmountable. For some fortunate litigants, further review is possible. For questions about potential Supreme Court of Florida review of a lower court decision, contact Mr. Hauser at Pankauski Hauser PLLC at hauser@phflorida.com. Mr. Hauser has been certified by The Florida Bar as a specialist in appellate practice since 2009.