Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

474 So. 2d 292

474 So.2d 292

10 Fla.L.Weekly 1679

Maceda v. Duhig

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1985-07-09

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently May 1996

3 state decisions

Relies on Ash v. Coconut Grove Bank · In re Estate of Herman

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1985-07-09

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1The determinative issue in this appeal is whether the two appellants, Pura Maceda and Ellen Barba, as custodians and next friends of the two minor children of Esther Longo, deceased, and John Longo, her husband, had standing as interested parties to question the propriety of a settlement agreement which was entered into between John Duhig, as personal representative of the estate of Esther Longo and guardian of the property of the minor children, and Gladys Gerson and Don Cohen, holders of a mortgage encumbering the marital home of the Longos, and John Longo.

¶2The trial court ruled that Mrs. Maceda, who was the maternal grandmother, and Mrs. Barba, the maternal great-aunt, did not have standing to contest the actions of the personal representative and property guardian. We agree and affirm.

¶3While the grandmother and great-aunt who have custody of the minor children have an understandable interest in the mat*293ter, this does not constitute them interested persons for the purpose of participating in this litigation. Ash v. Coconut Grove Bank, 448 So.2d 605, 607 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); In Re Estate of Herman, 427 So.2d 195, 197 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).

¶4Therefore, the order appealed is affirmed.

¶5Affirmed.

/474/so2d/292 · .json · Public domain