MATTHIAS MORROW v. JOHN WESTLY MORROW

Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed February 8, 2023.
________________
No. 3D22-0858
Lower Tribunal No. 19-2015
________________
Matthias Morrow,
Appellant,
vs.
John Westly Morrow,
Appellee.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jorge E.
Cueto, Judge.
Counselaw, and Angelo M. Martin, for appellant.
Law Office of Elizabeth Delgado, P.A., and Elizabeth Delgado Mizrahi,
for appellee.
Before EMAS, HENDON, and MILLER, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
UPON CONFESSION OF ERROR
In these adversarial probate proceedings, appellant, Matthias Morrow,
challenges an order striking the purported last will and testament of the
decedent, Bunny Lee Morrow, as violative of section 732.502, Florida
Statutes (2018). On appeal, appellant contends the trial court erred in
striking the document without first conducting an evidentiary hearing. Upon
appellee’s commendable confession of error and our own independent
review of the record, we reverse. Although the will was handwritten, it
reflected the signatures of the testator, two witnesses, and a notary, along
with a notary seal. § 732.502(1), Fla. Stat. (“Every will must be in writing and
executed as follows: . . . The testator must sign the will at the end . . . . The
testator’s . . . [s]igning, or . . . [a]cknowledgment . . . [t]hat he or she has
previously signed the will . . . must be in the presence of at least two attesting
witnesses . . . . The attesting witnesses must sign the will in the presence of
the testator and in the presence of each other.”); § 732.502(2), Fla. Stat. (“A
will in the testator’s handwriting that has been executed in accordance with
subsection (1) shall not be considered a holographic will.”). Consequently,
it did not facially violate the Florida Probate Code. Accordingly, we reverse
and remand for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
2