Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 95.231 (2025)

Limitations where deed or will on record.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

95.231 Limitations where deed or will on record.—

(1) Five years after the recording of an instrument required to be executed in accordance with s. 689.01; 5 years after the recording of a power of attorney accompanying and used for an instrument required to be executed in accordance with s. 689.01; or 5 years after the probate of a will purporting to convey real property, from which it appears that the person owning the property attempted to convey, affect, or devise it, the instrument, power of attorney, or will shall be held to have its purported effect to convey, affect, or devise, the title to the real property of the person signing the instrument, as if there had been no lack of seal or seals, witness or witnesses, defect in, failure of, or absence of acknowledgment or relinquishment of dower, in the absence of fraud, adverse possession, or pending litigation. The instrument is admissible in evidence. A power of attorney validated under this subsection shall be valid only for the purpose of effectuating the instrument with which it was recorded.

(2) After 20 years from the recording of a deed or the probate of a will purporting to convey real property, no person shall assert any claim to the property against the claimants under the deed or will or their successors in title.

(3) This law is cumulative to all laws on the subject matter.

History.—ss. 1, 2, ch. 10171, 1925; CGL 4660, 4661; ss. 1-4, ch. 21790, 1943; s. 35, ch. 69-216; s. 17, ch. 74-382; s. 1, ch. 2013-234; s. 20, ch. 2019-71.

Note.—Former ss. 95.23, 95.26.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 17 cases, 1977–2019 · leading case: Holland v. Hattaway, 438 So. 2d 456 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Holland v. Hattaway, 438 So. 2d 456 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). · cites it 14× “Curative acts with limitations provisions (such as section 95.231, previously considered) rectify specified title defects by barring attacks on the title based on such specified defects after a stated time running from some described event.”

Rigby v. Liles, 505 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). · cites it 4× “Cases falling under § 95.231 include actions to quiet title and to establish resulting trusts, void deeds, dower interest, and defective deeds.”

Inglis v. First Union Nat. Bank, 797 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). · cites it 12× “231(2), Fla. Stat. (2000). This court has held that claims for reformation of a deed, such as appellee Colson's claim here, are subject to the twenty-year limitation period set forth in section 95.”

Mark A. Saccullo v. United States, 913 F.3d 1010 (11th Cir. 2019). · cites it 7× “Here's the (very) short story: In 1998, the appellant's aging father executed a deed conveying property to a trust created for the appellant's benefit-but unfortunately, failed to procure a second witness, as Florida law requires.”

Earp & Shriver, Inc. v. Earp, 466 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). · cites it 6× “The corporation admits that subsection (2) of section 95.231 which was carried forward from section 95.”

Steigman v. Danese, 502 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). · cites it 2× “Appellants take the position that the 20-year limitation period set forth in section 95.231(2), Florida Statutes, [2] is applicable to Counts I, II, and III of the complaint.”

Silver Shells Corp. v. St. Maarten at Silver Shells Condo. Ass'n, 169 So. 3d 197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015). “The fact that the remedy sought by the Association for the alleged breach was the “equitable reformation” of the Restrictive Covenants through the invalidation of the amendment does not change the nature of the underlying claim.”

Davis v. Hinson, 67 So. 3d 1107 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). · cites it 7× “As authority for this proposition, the court cited section 95.231, Florida Statutes (2010). Finally, the court found Davis had encroached on 75 feet of the Hinsons’ eleven-acre parcel without obtaining their permission.”

Hardey v. Shell, 144 So. 3d 668 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014). · cites it 6× “Moreover, the twenty-year limitation in section 95.231 does not bar the Hardeys’ count for declaratory relief.”

Moore v. Smith-Snagg, 793 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). “In that case, Judge Cowart carefully analyzed the law and concluded that even the twenty year statute of limitation [section 95.231(2), Fla. Stat.] applicable to recorded deeds will not prevent an action to set aside a forged or wild deed.”

Yawn v. Blackwell, 343 So. 2d 906 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). · cites it 2× “The court determined that there was no genuine issue of material fact because, under the facts presented, the plaintiffs' claim was actually for the imposition of a constructive trust, which imposition is barred by Section 95.”

Alexander v. Alexander, 65 V.I. 372 (2016). “1985) (holding that the requisite passage of time cured an unwitnessed deed pursuant to Fla. Stat. Ann. § 95.231 ). Anduze never requested equitable relief from the Superior Court and we decline to address as part of this appeal whether reformation of the defective deed would…”

Show all 17 citing cases →

— 95.231(1) — 2 cases

Earp & Shriver, Inc. v. Earp, 466 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). “The corporation admits that subsection (2) of section 95.231 which was carried forward from section 95.”

Holland v. Hattaway, 438 So. 2d 456 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). “Curative acts with limitations provisions (such as section 95.231, previously considered) rectify specified title defects by barring attacks on the title based on such specified defects after a stated time running from some described event.”

— 95.231(2) — 9 cases

Inglis v. First Union Nat. Bank, 797 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). “231(2), Fla. Stat. (2000). This court has held that claims for reformation of a deed, such as appellee Colson's claim here, are subject to the twenty-year limitation period set forth in section 95.”

Steigman v. Danese, 502 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). “Appellants take the position that the 20-year limitation period set forth in section 95.231(2), Florida Statutes, [2] is applicable to Counts I, II, and III of the complaint.”

Rigby v. Liles, 505 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). “Cases falling under § 95.231 include actions to quiet title and to establish resulting trusts, void deeds, dower interest, and defective deeds.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.