Piloto v. Lauria
Florida District Court of Appeal
45 So. 3d 565 (2010)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Jesus Piloto died intestate, survived by his wife, Hilda Piloto (defendant), and four adult children from a prior marriage (plaintiffs). Jesus was domiciled in Venezuela, and his estate was probated there. The Venezuelan court ruled that Hilda and the four adult children were Jesus’s sole heirs, but the court did not appoint a personal representative for the estate. Jesus’s estate included real property and cash assets in Florida. The Florida circuit court, at the children’s petition, appointed the children’s attorney (plaintiff) as the ancillary personal representative for the estate’s Florida assets. Hilda challenged the appointment, arguing that she was entitled to preferential appointment as the ancillary personal representative because she was Jesus’s surviving spouse. The children opposed Hilda’s challenge, arguing that (1) the Venezuelan judgment should be granted comity; (2) pursuant to the judgment and Venezuelan law, the children had the right to select the ancillary personal representative because they were the majority beneficiaries; and (3) even under Florida law, the children still had the authority to select the personal representative as the majority beneficiaries. The court revoked the attorney’s appointment and instead appointed Hilda as the estate’s ancillary personal representative. The children appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Gerber, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
