## Facts

- Ann Smith was 79 years old and had assets alleged to total roughly $191,000; her stepson, Nathan D. Smith II, managed her finances under a power of attorney.
- Ann lived with her stepdaughter, Cassandra Dinkins, in a home Ann owned.
- After Nathan learned Ann had spent about $11,000 to purchase a vehicle for Dinkins, he filed a petition to determine Ann’s incapacity and to appoint a guardian over Ann’s person and property, alleging Alzheimer’s-type dementia.
- While the petition was pending, the trial court appointed Teresa Barton, a professional guardian, as temporary guardian.
- The court appointed an examining committee to evaluate Ann; multiple evaluators (including an additional examiner beyond the initial committee) concluded Ann suffered from dementia and recommended a plenary guardianship.
- At the hearing, Ann’s testimony reflected confusion, including mixing up dates, forgetting names, and difficulty with basic math.
- Ann presented two witnesses (a psychologist and a licensed psychotherapist/social worker) who testified that, after meeting with her, they believed she could manage her affairs and questioned the dementia diagnosis.
- The trial court found Ann lacked capacity to make decisions regarding her person and property except for decisions about where to reside, how to vote, and whom to socialize with.
- The trial court appointed Barton as limited guardian, authorizing her to make decisions for Ann in the removed areas while leaving Ann’s retained rights intact.
- Ann appealed, arguing the evidence did not support the incapacity determination and that appointing a guardian was improper.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court’s finding that Ann Smith was incapacitated in specified areas was supported by competent, substantial evidence under Florida guardianship law.
2. Whether the trial court erred in appointing a limited guardian over Ann’s person and property in light of competing testimony about her mental condition and functional ability.

## Decision

- Affirmed.
- Held that the record contained competent, substantial evidence supporting the trial court’s determination that Ann lacked capacity in the decision-making areas removed.
- Concluded the trial court acted within its discretion in imposing a limited guardianship that left Ann with certain personal rights (residence, voting, and social relationships).

## Legal Principles

- A guardianship adjudication must rest on legally sufficient evidence of functional incapacity in the decision-making domains at issue, not merely on a diagnosis label.
- Appellate review is deferential when the trial court’s findings are supported by competent, substantial evidence; an appellate court does not reweigh conflicting testimony.
- Florida guardianship law favors limiting the scope of guardianship to the areas where incapacity is shown, leaving remaining rights with the ward when supported by the evidence.
- A trial court may credit examining committee evaluations and other record evidence over opposing testimony when resolving conflicts about capacity.

## Conclusion

Smith v. Smith affirmed a limited guardianship for an elderly woman after the trial court credited examining committee findings and hearing evidence showing dementia-related impairment in managing personal and property decisions, while preserving her ability to decide where to live, how to vote, and whom to socialize with, despite contrary testimony offered on her behalf.


Smith v. Smith, 917 So. 2d 400 (2005)