Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 744.397 (2025)
Application of income of property of ward.
✓ 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
744.397 Application of income of property of ward.—
(1) The court may authorize the guardian of the property to apply the ward’s income, first to the ward’s care, support, education, and maintenance, and then for the care, support, education, maintenance, cost of final illness, and cost of funeral and burial or cremation of the parent, spouse, or dependents, if any, of the ward, to the extent necessary. If the income is not sufficient for these purposes, the court may authorize the expenditure of part of the principal for such purposes from time to time.
(2) The word “dependents,” as used in subsection (1) means, in addition to those persons who are legal dependents of a ward under existing law, the person or persons whom the ward is morally or equitably obligated to aid, assist, maintain, or care for, including, but not limited to, such persons as the indigent spouse of the ward, based upon the showing of an existing need and an ability of the estate of the ward to pay for, provide, or furnish the aid, assistance, maintenance, or care without unreasonably jeopardizing the care, support, and maintenance of the ward.
(3) If the ward is a minor and the ward’s parents are able to care for him or her and to support, maintain, and educate him or her, the guardian of the minor shall not so use his or her ward’s property unless directed or authorized to do so by the court.
History.—s. 1, ch. 74-106; ss. 16, 26, ch. 75-222; s. 66, ch. 89-96; s. 50, ch. 90-271; s. 1099, ch. 97-102.
Note.—Created from former s. 744.64.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases, 1980–2014 · leading case: Romano v. Olshen, 153 So. 3d 912 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014).
Romano v. Olshen, 153 So. 3d 912 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). “” § 744.397(1), Fla. Stat. (2012). For the performance of these duties, the guardian and the guardian’s attorneys are “entitled to a reasonable fee for services rendered and reimbursement for costs incurred on behalf of the ward.”
Beck v. Beck, 383 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). “§ 744.397(3), Fla. Stat. (1979). CONCLUSION At trial, it was conceded that Mr.”
Ash v. Coconut Grove Bank, 443 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). “To the contrary, section 744.397(3), Florida Statutes (1981) provides that: If the ward is a minor and his parents are able to care for him and to support, maintain, and educate him, the guardian of the property of the minor shall not so use his ward's property unless directed…”
Tanner v. Jannis, 564 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). “§ 744.397, Fla.Stat. (1987). Section 744.”
Green v. Guardianship of Green, 67 So. 3d 432 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011). “§ 744.397, Fla. Stat. (2011). Section 744.”
Guardianship of J.S.J. v. Pena, 109 So. 3d 1281 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013). “In fact, section 744.397(3), Florida Statutes (2011), suggests otherwise.”
— 744.397(1) — 1 case
Romano v. Olshen, 153 So. 3d 912 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). “” § 744.397(1), Fla. Stat. (2012). For the performance of these duties, the guardian and the guardian’s attorneys are “entitled to a reasonable fee for services rendered and reimbursement for costs incurred on behalf of the ward.”
— 744.397(2) — 1 case
Tanner v. Jannis, 564 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). “§ 744.397, Fla.Stat. (1987). Section 744.”
— 744.397(3) — 3 cases
Beck v. Beck, 383 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). “§ 744.397(3), Fla. Stat. (1979). CONCLUSION At trial, it was conceded that Mr.”
Ash v. Coconut Grove Bank, 443 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). “To the contrary, section 744.397(3), Florida Statutes (1981) provides that: If the ward is a minor and his parents are able to care for him and to support, maintain, and educate him, the guardian of the property of the minor shall not so use his ward's property unless directed…”
Guardianship of J.S.J. v. Pena, 109 So. 3d 1281 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013). “In fact, section 744.397(3), Florida Statutes (2011), suggests otherwise.”
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.