A Florida appeals court holds that it is not the proper venue for a trust administration dispute because the trustee and trust assets are located in New York, even though the trust had a Florida choice-of-law provision. Meyer v. Meyer(Fla. Dist. Ct. App., 5th Dist., No. 5D05-1911, June 23, 2006).
Richard Meyer, Jr., set up a trust that would terminate when he died, with half the assets going to his wife and half to his sons. The trust provided that all questions concerning the validity, construction, and administration of the trust would be resolved in accordance with the laws of Florida. It further provided that the trustee had discretion to change the jurisdiction. The trust assets and the trustee were located in New York.
After Mr. Meyer died, his wife filed a petition in a Florida trial court seeking to compel distribution of the trust. Mr. Meyer's sons filed a motion to dismiss, claiming that Florida was not the proper venue because the trustee and trust assets were located in New York, and none of the parties involved had any connection with Florida. The court denied their motion to dismiss without comment, and the sons appealed.
The District Court of Appeals of Florida reverses, holding that unless the interested parties cannot be bound by litigation in New York, that state is the proper venue. The court notes that although the trust has a choice-of-law provision, it does not designate Florida as the principal place for administration of the trust, so the trust should be administered from the trustee's usual place of business.
To download the full text of this decision, go to: https://attorney.elderlawanswers.com/meyer-v-meyer-fla-dist-ct-app-5th-dist-no-5d05-1911-june-23-2006-5489
Did you know that the ElderLawAnswers database now contains summaries of more than 1,100 fully searchable elder law decisions dating back to 1993? To search the database, click here.
Subscribe to the Knowledge Bank.
