Clement v. Charlotte Hospital Ass'n, Inc.
Florida District Court of Appeal
137 So. 2d 615 (1962)
Facts
Emily Carleton deeded property to W.B. Clement, Edwin Rountree (plaintiffs), and M.J. Alexander “as trustees for a corporation to be formed for the purpose of erecting, managing, and constructing a hospital” in Charlotte County. The deed further stated that the property was to be deeded back to Carleton if a hospital was not constructed on the property within a reasonable timeframe. A hospital was constructed and operating on the property within two years of the deed’s execution. Charlotte Hospital Association, Inc. (CHA) (defendant), a nonprofit corporation, was created to be the hospital’s administrator, and the trustees sat on its board of directors. Subsequently, CHA wanted to mortgage the property to fund an expansion, but Clement and Rountree refused to convey legal title for the property to CHA. The heirs of then-deceased M.J. Alexander disclaimed any interest in the property. CHA sued to force Clement and Rountree to transfer legal title, arguing that the trust provision in Carleton’s deed created a passive, stopgap trust that was terminated by Florida’s statute of uses after the hospital was constructed and CHA was established as the trust’s beneficiary nonprofit corporation. Clement and Rountree countered, arguing that the deed imposed continuing trust duties upon them and required them to continue holding legal title. The trial court granted summary judgment to CHA and directed Clement and Rountree to convey legal title. Clement and Rountree appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (White, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 706,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,400 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.