Man Kills Wife, Son Says he Forfeited All the Marital Assets under Florida’s Slayer Statute

If you die without a will and your married in Florida your spouse  gets everything  (assuming you had no children from other marriages). Even if you have a will you probably leave your spousea sizeable piece of your estate. In fact, if you do not leave your spouse anything (even if you do) they have a right to an “elective share” of 1/3 of your estate! That issometimes a lot of money. What happens if you tempt fate and murder your spouse? Is the marital property yours? In a strange decision the Florida Third District Court of Appeal says at least some of it is (I don’t know how fun that nice sports car or chateau will be from behind bars though.)

• On October 30, 2001 Silvia Locascio’s body was found brutally beaten in her home, her husband and brother-in-law were found guilty of the murder.
• The majority of the evidence against them was the testimony of her only son.
• Eight years later the son made an interesting claim – he argued that his father had forfeited all of his property rights in the couple’s marital assets as of the date of the murder. He based his argument on Fla. Stat. 732.802 which is Florida’s Slayer Statute which I have previously blogged about.  
• Why? Because the son wanted to force the father’s defense attorney to return hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorneys fees used in his defense of the murder convictions.

When a person murders his or her spouse, under Florida law the couple’s jointly-titled residence is deemed converted into tenants-in-common property. Result: murderer doesn’t inherit the couple’s house; instead the house is deemed owned 50/50 by the murderer and the deceased spouse’s estate. In the linked-to case Son argued that under Florida’s slayer statue his father’s 50% share of the couple’s residence was forfeited to his mother’s estate as of the date of her death. Both the trial-court judge and the 3d DCA rejected this argument.

Son also argued that his father had forfeited 100% of his property rights in the couple’s marital assets effective as of the date of his mother’s death. Again Son lost at the trial-court level and before the 3d DCA.

Maybe this is obvious but here is my two sense:

1. Divorce is not cheap, but neither is murder. Do not try to save money on that pesky divorce by resorting to murder. If the morality of it all does not dawn on you, this case shows your going to get caught and spend all that money on defending yourself anyways. (The husband spent about $75,000,000.00 on his and his brother’s defenses!)
2. The Slayer Statute has limitations. In the present case it can be very depressing to see that the Son lost, that essentially the husband will keep his entire half of the propertyand I have a feeling he will disinherit his son who helped lock him up for murder.But Courts must be very wary of forfeitures, seizing of property is a serious matter than cannot be taken lightly.