## Facts

- Charles L. Bryan executed a revocable living trust and a pour-over will that devised the residue of his probate estate to the trust.
- The trust directed that, “Upon my death,” the remaining trust principal and income “shall be distributed” to Bryan’s grandson, Robert R. Bizzell, “if he is living at the time of distribution,” and, if not, to Bryan’s children and their descendants per stirpes.
- Bryan died; his will was admitted to probate.
- Bizzell became personal representative of Bryan’s estate and, with an accountant, co-trustee of the trust; they began distributing trust assets to Bizzell.
- Before all trust assets were distributed, Bizzell died intestate.
- Victoria Dethlefs, Bizzell’s half-sister and a beneficiary of Bizzell’s estate, sought summary judgment that the trust assets vested in Bizzell at Bryan’s death and were therefore part of Bizzell’s estate.
- Potential alternate beneficiaries under Bryan’s trust argued that vesting occurred only upon actual distribution; thus, any undistributed assets at Bizzell’s death should pass to them under the trust’s alternative gift.

## Issues

1. Whether the trust’s direction to distribute to Bizzell “upon my death” if he was “living at the time of distribution” caused the trust assets to vest in Bizzell at Bryan’s death (so undistributed assets passed through Bizzell’s estate) or only upon actual distribution (so undistributed assets passed to the alternate takers).
2. Whether the appellate court should grant certiorari relief from a nonfinal trial-court order directing liquidation of an estate asset, or instead treat the petition as an appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130.

## Decision

- Affirmed summary judgment for Dethlefs, holding that Bizzell’s interest in the trust vested upon Bryan’s death because Bizzell survived Bryan.
- Held that Bizzell’s later death did not divest his estate of the remaining, undistributed trust assets; those assets were part of Bizzell’s estate.
- Treated the certiorari petition challenging the liquidation order as a nonfinal appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130 and affirmed the order.

## Legal Principles

- Florida law favors early vesting of estates and beneficial interests unless the instrument clearly provides otherwise.
- Unambiguous trust language is enforced according to its plain meaning; extrinsic evidence is not used to change clear terms.
- Language directing distribution “upon my death” generally indicates vesting at the settlor’s death, and survivorship wording is read as a condition tied to that vesting point unless the instrument clearly makes vesting contingent on later administrative events.
- Once a beneficiary’s interest vests at the settlor’s death, the beneficiary’s subsequent death does not divest the beneficiary’s estate of undistributed trust assets absent clear contrary language.

## Conclusion

The court construed the trust’s distribution clause to vest the trust corpus in the grandson at the settlor’s death because the grandson survived the settlor; accordingly, undistributed trust assets remaining when the grandson later died passed through the grandson’s intestate estate rather than to the trust’s alternate beneficiaries, and the related liquidation order was also affirmed.


Bryan v. Dethlefs, 959 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)