## Facts

- Marvin L. Robinson (Decedent) and Marilyn Robinson (Wife) were married and accumulated 112 pieces of artwork and household furnishings kept in their marital home.
- Decedent paid for the artwork, but the couple selected pieces together and treated the collection as a joint marital collection.
- The couple maintained a binder containing an itemized inventory of the collection and paperwork relating to their purchases.
- Each piece of art was displayed in the home and labeled with an inventory number and the words “M&M Robinson Collection.”
- Insurance policies covering the collection named both Decedent and Wife as coinsureds.
- Decedent died testate in March 1992. Wife and Decedent’s brother, David Robinson (Personal Representative), served as co-personal representatives of the estate (and David also acted as a co-trustee of a related trust).
- Wife filed a petition in the probate proceeding seeking a declaration that she was the sole owner of the art and household goods because they vested in her by operation of law at Decedent’s death, based on inter vivos gifts and/or tenancy by the entirety.
- Personal Representative contended the art and household goods were estate assets and sought to treat them as available for sale to help satisfy estate tax liability.
- The trial court determined that the art and household furnishings vested in Wife by operation of law, while treating two pieces (identified as the “Tang Horse and Rider” and the “Nieman sailboat print”) as estate assets because Wife agreed to honor Decedent’s wishes concerning those items.
- Personal Representative appealed, arguing the trial court improperly presumed tenancy by the entirety rather than requiring proof.

## Issues

1. Whether competent, substantial evidence supported the trial court’s determination that the art collection and household furnishings vested in the surviving spouse by operation of law rather than becoming probate estate assets.
2. Whether the trial court committed reversible error by supposedly presuming tenancy by the entirety for the disputed personal property.

## Decision

- The District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, affirmed the trial court’s order.
- The court left in place the ruling that the art and household furnishings vested in Wife by operation of law, with the two identified pieces treated as estate assets based on Wife’s agreement.
- The appellate court rejected the claim that the trial court’s ownership determination required reversal.

## Legal Principles

- Spouses may hold personal property with survivorship characteristics, including tenancy by the entirety, when the evidence shows ownership was taken and maintained as a marital unit.
- When property vests in a surviving spouse by operation of law, it does not become part of the probate estate and is not generally available for payment of estate obligations as an estate asset.
- On appeal, a trial court’s factual findings on ownership will be upheld if supported by competent, substantial evidence, even where the record contains conflicting documents or testimony about disposition.
- Objective indicia of joint marital ownership of personal property can include joint insurance coverage, joint selection and management of the property, joint inventorying, and labeling reflecting a shared collection.

## Conclusion

The Fourth District affirmed the probate court’s determination that the parties’ art collection and household furnishings vested in Marilyn Robinson by operation of law at Marvin Robinson’s death, based on evidence that the couple treated the property as jointly owned with survivorship, so the items were not general estate assets (apart from two pieces treated as estate property by Wife’s agreement).


Robinson v. Robinson, 651 So. 2d 1271 (1995)