Victory on Appeal: Huth,Pratt & Milhauser Secures Reversal of Improper Transfer of Florida Probate Proceedings to New York in Florida’s Fourth DCA

Huth Pratt & Milhauser, PLLC is proud to announce that attorneys Brandan J. Pratt and Zander J. Retamar secured a significant appellate victory in the Fourth District Court of Appeal of Florida.  The appeal involved jurisdiction and venue issues in probate proceedings.  In a fiercely contested probate matter, the firm successfully reversed a probate court’s order transferring the probate administration from Florida to New York, preserving the administration of a multi-property estate in Broward County. 

In Markes v. Markes (No. 4D2024-2101), the Decedent came to the United States from Jamaica, residing in New York City for many years. He frequented Florida on vacations and amassed considerable property in the state.  The Decedent had, over the years, made known that it was his intention that when he retired, he would retire in either Florida or Jamaica, the latter being his home country and as to which he had retained citizenship.  The Decedent executed documents confirming his intention to make Florida his residence.  In early 2017, the Decedent was hospitalized in New York after suffering at least one stroke. In July 2017, Appellee, one of the Decedent’s children, filed a petition in New York, seeking the appointment of a guardian due to the Decedent’s incapacitation. In October 2018, the New York guardianship court appointed a guardian of the property of the Decedent. The New York guardianship proceeding concerned the Decedent’s property, not his person.  The Decedent could make his own decisions regarding his residence, as the guardianship order contemplated.  The Decedent remained in New York until August of 2020, living in an assisted living facility. He then moved to Jamaica and resided there until his death in May 2023.

Appellants initiated probate proceedings in Florida claiming that Florida had jurisdiction over the probate proceedings and venue was proper in Broward County. Appellants claimed that the Decedent was domiciled in Broward County when he died and that the estate’s assets included ten pieces of real property in Florida, eight of which were in Broward County.  The petition for administration listed Appellants and another child as the beneficiaries, specifically noting that Appellee was intentionally disinherited by the Decedent’s 2017 will, which Appellants sought to probate. Upon receiving notice of the probate proceedings, Appellee intervened in the probate proceedings and sought to transfer the proceedings to New York.  Appellee also sought to invalidate the Decedent’s 2017 will.  The trial court ruled that the Decedent’s last U.S. domicile was New York and entered an order that transferred the probate to the New York. 

On appeal, the Fourth DCA reversed the trial court’s order, agreeing with the Appellants—represented by Mr. Pratt and Mr. Retamar.  The appellate court explained that although the Decedent’s last domicile in the United States was in New York, and he had a guardianship proceeding filed there, that does not control the issue of domicile. The critical fact of domicile is the Decedent’s present intention at the time of his death, as domicile requires the present residence “with positive or presumptive proof of an intention to remain there for an unlimited time.”  The Broward court’s factual findings, and even its analysis of the law, shows Jamaica was the Decedent’s domicile at the time of his death.  Even if New York could assert some jurisdiction over the Decedent’s estate, Florida statutes provide that Florida courts retain jurisdiction to adjudicate the disposition of the Decedent’s property in this State.  Furthermore, the Broward court erred in determining that the proceedings should be “transferred” to New York where the guardianship remains pending, but no probate proceeding has been opened. Indeed, no authority exists for a Florida court to “transfer” a proceeding to another state.  The appellate court noted that it is uncertain whether “New York would assert any jurisdiction over the Decedent’s estate if he did not own property in that state and was not domiciled there when he died.” 

The opinion concluded by remanding the case for further proceedings in Florida, effectively reinstating the administration of the estate in Broward County.  This ruling reaffirms Florida’s jurisdictional authority in probate matters involving real property located within the state, even when the Decedent was domiciled abroad. It also underscores the importance of a firm understanding of both domicile law and probate venue statutes—an area in which Huth Pratt & Milhauser continues to demonstrate excellence. Click here for Opinion Disposition PDF.

For more information on our appellate and probate litigation services, please contact Huth, Pratt & Milhauser, PLLC at www.FloridaTrustLaw.com and (561) 392-1800.