Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 717.1242 (2025)
Restatement of jurisdiction of the circuit court sitting in probate and the department.
✓ 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
717.1242 Restatement of jurisdiction of the circuit court sitting in probate and the department.—
(1) It is and has been the intent of the Legislature that, pursuant to s. 26.012(2)(b), circuit courts have jurisdiction of proceedings relating to the settlement of the estates of decedents and other jurisdiction usually pertaining to courts of probate. It is and has been the intent of the Legislature that, pursuant to this chapter, the department determines the merits of claims and entitlement to unclaimed property paid or delivered to the department under this chapter. Consistent with this legislative intent, any beneficiary, devisee, heir, personal representative, or other interested person, as those terms are defined in the Florida Probate Code and the Florida Trust Code, of an estate seeking to obtain property paid or delivered to the department under this chapter must file a claim with the department as provided in s. 717.124.
(2) If any estate or heir of an estate seeks or obtains an order from a circuit court sitting in probate directing the department to pay or deliver to any person property paid or delivered to the department under this chapter, the estate or heir shall be ordered to pay the department reasonable costs and attorney’s fees in any proceeding brought by the department to oppose, appeal, or collaterally attack the order if the department is the prevailing party in any such proceeding.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 2013–2018 · leading case: Atwater v. City of Cape Coral, 120 So. 3d 595 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013).
Atwater v. City of Cape Coral, 120 So. 3d 595 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013). “See § 717.1242. Because the CFO has the exclusive power to distribute the surplus funds, the courts acted in excess of their authority and jurisdiction when they directed the release of the funds, issued orders to show cause, and attempted to hold the CFO in contempt.”
Yergin v. Georgopolos, 217 So. 3d 155 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017). “” § 717.1242(1), Fla. Stat. (2015). The Legislature then laid out an extensive administrative procedure for seeking unclaimed property.”
Choice Plus, LLC v. Dep't of Fin. Servs., etc., 244 So. 3d 343 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018). “032 provided that the surplus funds became unclaimed property controlled by chapter 717, such that under section 717.1242 the Chief Financial Officer and the Department alone had the authority to make the final determination as to the disposition of the unclaimed funds).”
— 717.1242(1) — 3 cases
Atwater v. City of Cape Coral, 120 So. 3d 595 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013). “See § 717.1242. Because the CFO has the exclusive power to distribute the surplus funds, the courts acted in excess of their authority and jurisdiction when they directed the release of the funds, issued orders to show cause, and attempted to hold the CFO in contempt.”
Yergin v. Georgopolos, 217 So. 3d 155 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017). “” § 717.1242(1), Fla. Stat. (2015). The Legislature then laid out an extensive administrative procedure for seeking unclaimed property.”
Choice Plus, LLC v. Dep't of Fin. Servs., etc., 244 So. 3d 343 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018). “032 provided that the surplus funds became unclaimed property controlled by chapter 717, such that under section 717.1242 the Chief Financial Officer and the Department alone had the authority to make the final determination as to the disposition of the unclaimed funds).”
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.