Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 733.106 (2025)
Costs and attorney fees.
✓ 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
733.106 Costs and attorney fees.—
(1) In all probate proceedings, costs may be awarded as in chancery actions.
(2) A person nominated as personal representative, or any proponent of a will if the person so nominated does not act within a reasonable time, if in good faith justified in offering the will in due form for probate, shall receive costs and attorney fees from the estate even though probate is denied or revoked.
(3) Any attorney who has rendered services to an estate may be awarded reasonable compensation from the estate.
(4) If costs and attorney fees are to be paid from the estate under this section, s. 733.6171(4), s. 736.1005, or s. 736.1006, the court, in its discretion, may direct from what part of the estate they shall be paid.
(a) If the court directs an assessment against a person’s part of the estate and such part is insufficient to fully pay the assessment, the court may direct payment from the person’s part of a trust, if any, if a pour-over will is involved and the matter is interrelated with the trust.
(b) All or any part of the costs and attorney fees to be paid from the estate may be assessed against one or more persons’ part of the estate in such proportions as the court finds to be just and proper.
(c) In the exercise of its discretion, the court may consider the following factors:
1. The relative impact of an assessment on the estimated value of each person’s part of the estate.
2. The amount of costs and attorney fees to be assessed against a person’s part of the estate.
3. The extent to which a person whose part of the estate is to be assessed, individually or through counsel, actively participated in the proceeding.
4. The potential benefit or detriment to a person’s part of the estate expected from the outcome of the proceeding.
5. The relative strength or weakness of the merits of the claims, defenses, or objections, if any, asserted by a person whose part of the estate is to be assessed.
6. Whether a person whose part of the estate is to be assessed was a prevailing party with respect to one or more claims, defenses, or objections.
7. Whether a person whose part of the estate is to be assessed unjustly caused an increase in the amount of costs and attorney fees incurred by the personal representative or another interested person in connection with the proceeding.
8. Any other relevant fact, circumstance, or equity.
(d) The court may assess a person’s part of the estate without finding that the person engaged in bad faith, wrongdoing, or frivolousness.
History.—s. 1, ch. 74-106; s. 49, ch. 75-220; s. 984, ch. 97-102; s. 82, ch. 2001-226; s. 1, ch. 2015-27.
Note.—Created from former s. 732.14.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 96
cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case: In Re Est. of Simon, 549 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).
In Re Est. of Simon, 549 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). “609, Florida Statutes (1987) and section 733.106(3), Florida Statutes (1987).”
Bennett v. Berges, 50 So. 3d 1154 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). “The children’s attorney also testified, claiming that she was entitled to fees based upon section 733.106, Florida Statutes, in that her efforts benefited the estate by ending litigation and preserving assets.”
Dayton v. Conger, 448 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). “The final issue presented is whether the portion of the court's order assessing costs against the beneficiaries personally was proper.”
Stand. Guar. Ins. Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 1990). “[9] § 733.106, Fla. Stat. (1987). [10] § 738.”
Shuck v. Smalls, 101 So. 3d 924 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). “105, but we remanded the case to the lower court to “determine attorneys’ fees pursuant to Fla. Stat. 733.106.” By order dated April 11, 2011, the trial court awarded attorney’s fees, costs, and prejudgment interest totaling ,806.”
In Re Est. of Lewis, 442 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). “Rosch, a beneficiary under the terms of the decedent's will, appeals from the denial of his claim for attorney's fees, which claim was based upon the provisions of F.S. § 733.106 (1979). We reverse. Mrs. Lewis, as personal representative, petitioned to revoke the devise to Dr.”
In Re Est. of Hand, 475 So. 2d 1337 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). “*1339 The law authorizing the payment of attorney's fees and costs to proponents of wills is Section 733.106, Florida Statutes (1983).”
Carman v. Gilbert, 641 So. 2d 1323 (Fla. 1994). “Section 733.106, Florida Statutes (1989), provides for the award of costs and attorney fees in probate proceedings.”
In re Est. of Lane, 562 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). “We find merit with the appellants’ arguments and reverse the assessment against the individual beneficiaries’ shares in the estate.”
Snyder v. Bell, 746 So. 2d 1100 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). “§ 733.106, Fla. Stat. (1995). Snyder does not contend that Bell is not entitled to attorney's fees under this section, but argues that fees should be awarded solely from Frances' share of the Estate.”
In Re Est. of Gaspelin, 542 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). “§ 733.106, Fla. Stat. (1985). The lower court's order seems to rely upon both provisions in awarding attorney's fees to the beneficiaries' attorney.”
Est. of Shefner v. Shefner-Holden, 2 So. 3d 1076 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009). “Deborah and Frank assert they should have been awarded attorney’s fees for defending this claim because their defense effectuated the decedent’s testamentary intent. Linda and Susan, on the other hand, contend that the trial court properly denied the requested attorney’s fees.”
— 733.106(1) — 12 cases
Dayton v. Conger, 448 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). “The final issue presented is whether the portion of the court's order assessing costs against the beneficiaries personally was proper.”
Baptist Hosp. of Miami, Inc. v. Carter, 658 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).
In Re Est. of Williams, 771 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
Narus v. Narus, 382 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).
Holley v. First Guar. Bank & Trust Co., 699 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).
— 733.106(2) — 14 cases
Bissmeyer v. Se. Bank, 596 So. 2d 678 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).
Hays v. Lawrence, 1 So. 3d 1176 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009).
In Re Est. of Lewis, 442 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). “Rosch, a beneficiary under the terms of the decedent's will, appeals from the denial of his claim for attorney's fees, which claim was based upon the provisions of F.S. § 733.106 (1979). We reverse. Mrs. Lewis, as personal representative, petitioned to revoke the devise to Dr.”
In Re Est. of Gaspelin, 542 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). “§ 733.106, Fla. Stat. (1985). The lower court's order seems to rely upon both provisions in awarding attorney's fees to the beneficiaries' attorney.”
Price v. Austin, 43 So. 3d 789 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).
— 733.106(3) — 45 cases
In Re Est. of Simon, 549 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). “609, Florida Statutes (1987) and section 733.106(3), Florida Statutes (1987).”
Bennett v. Berges, 50 So. 3d 1154 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). “The children’s attorney also testified, claiming that she was entitled to fees based upon section 733.106, Florida Statutes, in that her efforts benefited the estate by ending litigation and preserving assets.”
Dayton v. Conger, 448 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). “The final issue presented is whether the portion of the court's order assessing costs against the beneficiaries personally was proper.”
Langer v. Fels, 93 So. 3d 1069 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012).
Cooper v. Ford & Sinclair, PA, 888 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).
— 733.106(4) — 12 cases
Shuck v. Smalls, 101 So. 3d 924 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). “105, but we remanded the case to the lower court to “determine attorneys’ fees pursuant to Fla. Stat. 733.106.” By order dated April 11, 2011, the trial court awarded attorney’s fees, costs, and prejudgment interest totaling ,806.”
In re Est. of Lane, 562 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). “We find merit with the appellants’ arguments and reverse the assessment against the individual beneficiaries’ shares in the estate.”
Dayton v. Conger, 448 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). “The final issue presented is whether the portion of the court's order assessing costs against the beneficiaries personally was proper.”
Geary v. Butzel Long, P.C., 13 So. 3d 149 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009).
Est. of Paulk v. Lindamood, 529 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).
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.