Divided Supreme Court Rules on Ward's Right to Marry
The Florida Supreme Court answered a certified question on the right of incapacitated people to marry.
September 01, 2017 at 11:00 PM
3 minute read
The certified question before the Florida Supreme Court seemed simple, but has far-reaching consequences regarding the rights of incapacitated people.
The case puts Florida laws governing legal guardianships in the spotlight, and how a probate court's removal of some rights might affect a ward's remaining freedoms. It came as Florida legislators re-examined the guardianship system, long plagued by accusations of corporate greed and policies designed to benefit guardians instead of wards and heirs.
The dispute focused on a ward of the court's right to marry, and asked justices: If permission is required to wed, does marrying without that approval render the marriage void or voidable?
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
2,000 Docket Entries: Complex South Florida Dispute Sets Precedent
Second DCA Greenlights USF Class Certification on COVID-19 College Tuition Refunds
3 minute read
U.S. Eleventh Circuit Remands Helms-Burton Trafficking Case Involving Confiscated Cuban Port
3 minute read
Miami Lawyer Guilty of Indirect Criminal Contempt But Dodges Paying Legal Fees
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Apply Now: Superior Court Judge Sought for Mountain Judicial Circuit Bench
- 2Harrisburg Jury Hands Up $1.5M Verdict to Teen Struck by Underinsured Driver
- 3Former Director's Retaliation Suit Cleared to Move Forward Against Hospice Provider
- 4New York Judge Steps Down After Conviction for Intoxicated Driving
- 5Keys to Maximizing Efficiency (and Vibes) When Navigating International Trade Compliance Crosschecks
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
