WILLIAM WILSON, JR., INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MURIEL B. WILSON AND JOHN WILSON, AS SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE MURIEL B. WILSON REVOCABLE TRUST vs CLARENCE H. HOUSTON, JR., AS CURATOR OF THE ESTATE OF THOMAS M. BOYETTE, SR.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED WILLIAM WILSON, JR., INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MURIEL B. WILSON AND JOHN WILSON, AS SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE OF THE MURIEL B. WILSON REVOCABLE TRUST, Appellants, v. Case No. 5D20-218 CLARENCE H. HOUSTON, JR., AS CURATOR OF THE ESTATE OF THOMAS M. BOYETTE, SR., Appellee. / Opinion filed June 18, 2021 Appeal from the Circuit Court for St. Johns County, R. Lee Smith, Judge. Bryan S. Gowdy, of Creed & Gowdy, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellants. Michael J. Korn, of Korn & Zehmer, P.A., Jacksonville, and Joshua A. Woolsey and Nicholas W. Morcom, of Woolsey Morcom, PLLC, Ponte Vedra, for Appellee. WALLIS, J. Appellants appeal the Amended Final Judgment entered in favor of Appellee, which found that they were liable to Appellee for damages that arose out of the sale of property in St. Johns County. We agree with Appellants that the trial court abused its discretion when it denied their request for leave to amend their pleadings to add a setoff defense. See S. Devs. & Earthmoving, Inc. v. Caterpillar Fin. Servs. Corp., 56 So. 3d 56, 62– 63 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (holding that the trial court abused its discretion by denying appellant's motion for leave to amend its answer to add a counterclaim where appellant did not abuse the privilege to amend, the proposed amendment would not have been futile, and appellee would not have been prejudiced by the amendment). Therefore, we reverse the portion of the Amended Final Judgment awarding Appellee damages and remand for the trial court to consider Appellants' claims related to the setoff defense. In all other respects we affirm. AFFIRMED in Part, REVERSED in Part, and REMANDED. EISNAUGLE and WOZNIAK, JJ., concur. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
