← Case library
3rd DCAApril 3, 2019Affirmed🔬 Novel Issue

Sibley v. In Re: Estate of Curtiss F. Sibley

Case No. 18-2027

A trust directed the residue to the settlor's charitable foundation, but provided that if the foundation was 'no longer in existence' at the settlor's death, the residue would pass to Fellowship House. The foundation had been administratively dissolved three months before death and reinstated seven months after. The Third DCA affirmed, holding the foundation was 'no longer in existence' at death and that the corporate reinstatement relation-back provision of section 607.1422(3) does not apply to determine a beneficiary's existence at a fixed testamentary point in time.

Key facts

  • Settlor created a trust directing residue to a charitable foundation, with an alternative gift to Fellowship House if the foundation was 'no longer in existence' at the settlor's death.
  • The foundation was administratively dissolved three months before the settlor's death and later reinstated seven months after death.
  • +2 more key facts with a free trial

Why it matters

This is the first Florida decision to squarely hold that the corporate reinstatement relation-back statute, section 607.1422(3), cannot be used to resurrect an entity beneficiary's existence as of a decedent's death… — full analysis with a trial

Best value · free

Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days

The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.

  • Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
  • Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
  • Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Start my free 30-day trial → No credit card required
👀 Take a quick tour of the site → 60 seconds · click a real case · no login

Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.

Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.