In Florida probate litigation, disputes often arise over how real estate was conveyed—or whether it was conveyed at all. Many heirs assume that if there is no recorded deed transferring a homestead, then the property must be part of the decedent’s probate estate.However, the recent decision in Fuentes v. Link, 394 So. 3d 684 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024), reminds us that a properly executed trust agreement can serve as a valid instrument of conveyance, even in the absence of a formal deed. This holding has critical implications for probate disputes, especially those involving intestacy claims, homestead status, and the enforceability of revocable trusts.
In Fuentes, the decedent, Douglas Link, died intestate and left behind a daughter from a prior relationship and a surviving spouse, Irene. Before his death, Douglas executed a revocable living trust naming Irene both as trustee and beneficiary. The trust provided that Irene would manage the property during Douglas’s lifetime and receive full ownership of the property upon his death. The trust document was signed by Douglas, by Irene, and by two witnesses—but no deed was ever recorded transferring title to the trust during Douglas’s life. After Douglas’s death, his daughter filed a petition to quiet title, arguing that the homestead remained in her father’s name and was therefore subject to intestate distribution. She claimed a share of the property under Florida’s intestacy laws.
The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Irene, and the Third DCA affirmed. The court held that the trust itself satisfied the formal requirements of Fla. Stat. § 689.01(1), which requires that a real property conveyance be in writing, signed in the presence of two witnesses. The trust contained express language conveying the homestead to the trustee and named Irene as both trustee and beneficiary. The court emphasized that the absence of a document titled “deed” and the fact that the trust was not recorded during life did not defeat the conveyance. What mattered was whether the trust clearly expressed an intent to transfer ownership, was properly executed, and met the statutory requirements. According to the court, it did all three.
This ruling has significant implications for litigators involved in probate disputes. One common scenario is where a child from a prior marriage challenges a surviving spouse’s claim to homestead property based on a lack of recorded title transfers. If the decedent had created a revocable trust that includes homestead property but failed to execute a deed during life, a quiet title action or claim for elective share may arise. The spouse may rely on the trust language itself as a valid conveyance, even without a recorded deed. Litigators should expect to see cases where the validity of trust-based conveyances is central to the dispute.
Another scenario may involve creditors of the estate attempting to argue that property is part of the probate estate and subject to claims. In such cases, the defense may point to a trust instrument that functioned as a deed, thereby removing the property from the estate and insulating it from creditors. Similarly, disputes may arise in partition actions involving jointly owned property where one party claims full ownership through a trust instrument.
This decision also offers a clear warning: form does not trump substance. If a trust is properly executed, with two witnesses and clear conveyance language, it may serve as a valid transfer of property—even in the absence of a separate deed. That means intestate heirs, creditors, and other claimants cannot rely solely on the public record to determine ownership. Trust documents must be reviewed carefully to determine whether they effectuate a transfer.
Litigators should be prepared to argue both sides. If you represent an heir, you’ll need to scrutinize the trust language, challenge the grantor’s intent or the delivery of the instrument, and look for evidence of revocation or lack of acceptance. If you represent a surviving spouse or trustee, your focus will be on demonstrating that the trust met all statutory formalities and reflected the grantor’s intent to transfer the property. The Fuentes case gives significant weight to properly executed trust instruments and provides a roadmap for enforcing conveyances made through those instruments—whether or not they were recorded prior to death.
In sum, Fuentes v. Link confirms that Florida law allows trusts to serve as effective vehicles for transferring real estate when drafted and executed correctly. For litigators, this expands the range of tools and arguments in probate and quiet title disputes. It also underscores the importance of reviewing not only recorded deeds, but also trust instruments, for evidence of conveyance. As more families rely on trusts to avoid probate, these issues are likely to become more common in Florida litigation.
If you have any Florida Trust or Real Estate dispute we would love to hear from you. We assist Clients all over the State of Florida and offer free, no obligation consultations.
-Brice Zoecklein, Esq.
813-501-5071
