In Re Estate of Butler
444 So. 2d 477, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11248 (1984)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A surviving spouse may be equitably estopped from asserting inheritance rights if their conduct, such as entering into a subsequent marriage and living as if divorced, constitutes a repudiation of the marital relationship with the decedent, even if the subsequent marriage was based on a good faith but mistaken belief in a divorce.
Facts:
- In 1946, Georgia Mae Butler and Nathaniel Butler, Jr. were married.
- They separated in 1947, at which point Nathaniel told Georgia Mae he had "bought" a divorce, which she believed.
- In 1950, Georgia Mae entered a ceremonial marriage with James Whitfield, with whom she had two children, and she continued to be known as Georgia Mae Whitfield.
- Georgia Mae later had three more children with three other men.
- In 1963, Nathaniel married Rosa Belle Butler after telling her he was divorced from Georgia Mae.
- Nathaniel and Rosa Belle lived continuously as husband and wife, had one child and adopted another, and jointly owned a home until Nathaniel's death in 1975.
- Georgia Mae knew Nathaniel had married Rosa Belle and saw him periodically but did not assert any marital rights during his lifetime.
Procedural Posture:
- In 1981, six years after Nathaniel Butler's death, Georgia Mae Butler filed a petition for administration of his estate in the trial court.
- In her petition, she sought to be appointed personal representative as the surviving spouse.
- Rosa Belle Butler, the decedent's second wife, filed objections to Georgia Mae's petition.
- Following a hearing, the trial court denied Georgia Mae's petition, ruling that she was estopped from asserting her rights as Nathaniel's widow.
- Georgia Mae Butler (appellant) appealed the trial court's judgment to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a surviving spouse, who remarried in the good faith but mistaken belief that her first husband had divorced her, estopped from asserting her rights as a widow to his estate?
Opinions:
Majority - Lehan, Judge
Yes, a surviving spouse is estopped from asserting her rights as a widow to his estate under these circumstances. Although the claiming spouse, Georgia Mae, may have believed she was divorced when she remarried, her actions constituted a repudiation of her marital status with the decedent, Nathaniel. The court found that when Georgia Mae remarried, she knew Nathaniel was still alive, knew she had not obtained a divorce herself, and knew she had not been served with any divorce papers. Citing with approval the case of Minor v. Higdon, the court held that her subsequent marriage and life choices operated to estop her from later claiming the benefits of a marriage she had abandoned. Having taken advantage of the purported 'divorce' for decades, she cannot now disclaim it to claim inheritance rights against the interests of the second, putative spouse.
Analysis:
This decision extends the doctrine of equitable estoppel in Florida probate law to situations where the estopped party acted in good faith. Previously, estoppel was primarily applied in cases involving blatant bigamy or reprehensible conduct. This case lowers that threshold, establishing that a spouse's long-term conduct repudiating a marriage is sufficient for estoppel, regardless of their subjective belief or intent. It prioritizes the public policy of protecting a long-standing, later marriage and the expectations of the second family over the technical legal status of a first spouse who has, by all outward appearances, abandoned the marriage.
