## Facts

- In 1979, William Demetree and other donors conveyed roughly twenty-four acres of land to Central Florida Sheltered Workshop, Inc. (CFSW), a nonprofit serving disadvantaged and handicapped adults.
- The land was given so CFSW could build a community of residential group homes for adults associated with the workshop.
- The deed transferring the land contained no conditions, reversionary language, or express trust terms.
- Demetree testified that he intended the conveyance to be a gift, not the creation of a charitable trust.
- CFSW solicited and received more than $200,000 in community contributions to help fund construction of the group homes on the donated land.
- The group-home community operated for almost fifteen years; day-to-day operating expenses were largely paid through residents’ Social Security benefits and payments by parents.
- Life Concepts, Inc. (successor to CFSW) later decided to close the group-home community and sell the land.
- Gail Persan, on behalf of disadvantaged adults living in the homes, sued Life Concepts, alleging the land donation (and related fundraising) created a charitable trust or, alternatively, a resulting trust that barred sale of the property and discontinuation of the homes.
- After Persan presented her case at a nonjury trial, the trial court entered a final judgment of involuntary dismissal, finding that the donations were made for a specific purpose but that no trust was proven.
- Persan appealed the dismissal to Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal.

## Issues

1. Did the donation of land (and related community fundraising) to a charitable corporation for the purpose of building and operating group homes create an enforceable charitable trust that would restrict the charity’s later decision to close the homes and sell the property?
2. If no charitable trust was created, did the evidence establish a resulting trust that would prevent the sale or require continued operation of the homes?
3. Did the trial court err by granting an involuntary dismissal at the close of the plaintiff’s case based on failure of proof of any trust?

## Decision

- The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed the final judgment of involuntary dismissal.
- The court held that the evidence did not establish an intent to create a charitable trust; it showed an intent to make a gift to a charitable corporation for a project.
- The court rejected the argument that a gift for a specific project, standing alone, is enough to create a charitable trust.
- The court also held the evidence did not support a resulting trust.
- The court reasoned that charities must be able to distinguish between accepting a gift and accepting fiduciary obligations as a trustee; treating purpose-directed gifts as trusts would create serious practical problems for charitable institutions.
- Although the court acknowledged the closure of the homes was unfortunate for the residents, it concluded the lawsuit lacked merit because no trust was proven.

## Legal Principles

- A donation to a charitable corporation for a specific project or purpose does not, by itself, create a charitable trust; there must be evidence of intent to create a trust relationship.
- For real property, an express trust generally requires compliance with statutory writing requirements; the absence of restrictions in the deed is strong evidence against an express trust.
- A donor’s hope or expectation that a charitable use will continue (even if described as “permanent” in planning) does not convert an outright gift into a trust without a clear manifestation of trust intent.
- A resulting trust is not established merely because property was donated for a particular charitable use; it requires facts showing the recipient was not intended to take beneficial ownership (or that beneficial ownership should revert), which was not shown here.
- In a bench trial, involuntary dismissal is proper where the plaintiff bears the burden of proving a trust and the plaintiff’s evidence fails to establish the trust’s creation or elements.

## Conclusion

Persan v. Life Concepts, Inc. holds that donating land to a charitable corporation to carry out a defined charitable project—without deed restrictions, a written trust, or other clear proof of trust intent—does not create a charitable or resulting trust that beneficiaries may enforce to block the charity’s later decision to close the program and sell the property; therefore, dismissal at the close of the plaintiff’s case was properly affirmed.


Persan v. Life Concepts, Inc., 738 So. 2d 1008 (1999)