Florida’s Sixth District Court of Appeal reverses and remands a case concerning a claim for an arbitration award that was contested by the deceased’s estate. In Palm Garden of Winter Haven, LLC, Appellant, v. Estate of Leon C. Demps, Appellee (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. No. 6D2023-3735, February 7, 2025).
In 2011, Leon Demps was admitted to Palm Garden of Winter Haven’s nursing home. Acting as Mr. Demps’ attorney-in-fact, his wife, Bobbie Demps, signed an arbitration agreement as part of his admission process. The agreement allowed Palm Garden to seek reimbursement for arbitrator compensation and administrative fees it incurred in any arbitration it prevailed in between it and Mr. Demps, Mrs. Demps, or Mr. Demps’ personal representative.
Mr. Demps died in December 2015. In September 2016, his estate filed a suit against Palm Garden, alleging nursing home negligence, violation of resident’s rights, breach of fiduciary duty, and wrongful death.
The estate published the requisite notice of administration giving notice to creditors on February 3 and 10, 2017. Creditors had until May 3, 2017, to file a claim.
In April 2017, Palm Garden successfully moved in the negligence action to compel binding arbitration under the arbitration agreement. The arbitration resulted in a defense verdict and a determination that Palm Garden was entitled to its costs. The arbitration panel awarded Palm Garden $193,176.11. Over five-and-a-half years later, Palm Garden filed a motion to prohibit disbursement of estate proceeds, then two days later filed a statement of claim for $193,176.11.
The estate moved to strike the statement of claim as untimely, citing statutes barring claims made more than two years after a person’s death and barring claims made three months after the first publication of the notice to creditors. Palm Garden argued that because its claim was based on action taken by the estate, and not a claim or cause of action against Mr. Demps, it was not subject to either the statute of nonclaim or the statute of limitations.
The trial court ruled in favor of the estate, reasoning that Palm Garden’s claim constituted a contingent claim for which Palm Garden was required to file a timely statement of claim in the probate proceeding, which it didn’t.
The court finds that Palm Garden’s claim is based on actions the estate took, by filing the lawsuit, not actions taken by Mr. Demps during his lifetime. As such, the statutes of nonclaim and limitations don’t apply. Therefore, the court reverses and remands the case.
Subscribe to the Knowledge Bank.
