## Facts

- George Urick was born in 1939; after his parents divorced and his father later died, Urick (age 15) began living with his mother and her husband, Gans Litman.
- Litman never formally adopted Urick.
- Evidence showed a long-standing father-son relationship: Urick referred to Litman as “dad,” family events and documents identified Litman as Urick’s father, and Urick later cared for Litman in old age.
- Urick’s mother died intestate in 1990; Litman died intestate two months later.
- Under Florida intestacy law, Urick would inherit from Litman only if treated as Litman’s lineal descendant; otherwise, the estate would pass to Litman’s collateral heirs.
- In the probate proceeding, Urick claimed an intestate share under the doctrine of virtual adoption.
- The probate court found no proof of an agreement or contract to adopt and denied Urick’s claim.

## Issues

1. Whether Urick established the elements of virtual adoption, particularly an agreement to adopt, such that equity would treat him as Litman’s adopted child for intestate succession.

## Decision

- The District Court of Appeal affirmed the probate court’s judgment for the estate’s co-personal representatives.
- The court held Urick was not a virtually adopted child because the evidence did not prove an agreement to adopt.
- As a result, Urick was not entitled to inherit an intestate share of Litman’s estate.

## Legal Principles

- Virtual (equitable) adoption in Florida is a narrow, contract-based doctrine used to enforce an agreement to adopt when a formal adoption was not completed.
- A claimant must prove an agreement to adopt (typically by clear and convincing evidence) along with performance consistent with that agreement (custody given, child living with adoptive parent, and parental treatment).
- Evidence of affection, family-like conduct, or a de facto parent-child relationship, without proof of an agreement to adopt, is insufficient to confer inheritance rights contrary to the intestacy statutes.
- Appellate review defers to the probate court’s factual finding that no adoption agreement was proven where that finding is supported by the record.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed denial of Urick’s intestate claim because virtual adoption requires proof of an agreement to adopt, and the record showed only a close father-son relationship without evidence of such an agreement.


Urick v. McFarland, 625 So. 2d 1253 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)