Skip to main content
Brandon Arkin, elder law attorney, Solkoff Legal, P.A.Brandon ArkinSolkoff Legal, P.A.

For families

Florida elder law updates for 2026, in plain English

Florida’s appellate courts and the Florida Supreme Court keep refining the rules on homestead, Medicaid estate recovery, trusts and court procedure that affect older adults and the families who help them. This page explains recent opinions in plain English, in our own words, and links the free official court PDF when one is public. Each note answers two questions: what the court actually did, and why a family in Delray Beach, Boca Raton or Boynton Beach might care. New notes are added as opinions come out. This is general education, not legal advice. How any opinion applies depends on the facts, so talk with a licensed Florida attorney about your own situation.

Educational only. This is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Probate and guardianship are not practice areas listed on this site. Some notes discuss probate and guardianship opinions only because they touch homestead, trusts or incapacity planning.

For families

What recent Florida court opinions mean for families

Each card leads with the official court PDF when one is public. Justia and FindLaw are free mirrors of the same opinion. A Florida Law Weekly citation (for example, “51 Fla. L. Weekly D2087a”) is a locator: it helps subscribers find the case. It is not a link to the paid text. A district court opinion generally binds Florida trial courts statewide unless another district has ruled differently. A trial-court order, like the one labeled “Supplement” below, is not binding precedent for other cases.

January 1 and July 1, 2026

Two sets of state figures changed this year: one on January 1 and one on July 1. A Florida probate change also took effect July 1. This card was checked against the July 2026 version of DCF's Appendix A-9.

Agency figures and statute · not a court opinion

What Florida Medicaid changed for 2026

Florida DCF ESS Policy Manual, Appendix A-9 (January 2026 and July 2026 versions) · CS/HB 1337 (2026), chapter 2026-57, Laws of Florida · Effective July 1, 2026

Florida updates its long-term care Medicaid figures on a set schedule, mostly when federal standards change. Here is what moved in 2026, in plain English.

The Florida Department of Children and Families (DCF) publishes the financial figures for nursing home Medicaid (the Institutional Care Program, or ICP) and home and community-based care in Appendix A-9 of its ESS Policy Manual. According to the chart's own footnotes, some figures change every January 1, some every April 1 and some every July 1, following federal law.

On January 1, 2026, per the January 2026 Appendix A-9:

Figure2025 figure2026 figure
SSI federal benefit rate (individual)$967$994
Monthly income cap for ICP and home-based care (300% of that rate)$2,901$2,982
Community Spouse Resource Allowance (CSRA): assets a spouse at home may keep$157,920$162,660
Home equity interest limit$730,000$752,000
Community spouse maximum income allowance (CSMIA)$3,948$4,067

The 2025 figures are the federal standards from the CMS 2025 bulletin, and the 2026 figures match the CMS 2026 bulletin.

On July 1, 2026, per the July 2026 Appendix A-9, two spousal figures changed:

FigureBefore July 1From July 1, 2026
Minimum Monthly Maintenance Needs Allowance (MMMNA): the income floor for a spouse at home$2,644$2,705
Excess shelter standard$794$812

Several figures did not change in either version: the $2,000 asset limit for an individual ($3,000 for a couple), the $160 personal needs allowance for a nursing home resident, and the $10,645 transfer-of-assets divisor (DCF uses it to turn a gift made during the 60-month look-back into a penalty period, and it has been in effect since April 1, 2025).

Also effective July 1, 2026: CS/HB 1337, approved by the Governor on April 29, 2026 as chapter 2026-57, raised the limit for summary administration (a shorter probate process) from $75,000 to $150,000, not counting property that is exempt from creditors. It also raised the limit for disposition without administration of certain personal property from $10,000 to $20,000. See section 735.201, Florida Statutes.

Figures like these decide whether an application is even close, so families should check the current A-9 before relying on any number they read online, including on this page.

Two hypotheticals show how the numbers are used. A widowed mother in Boca Raton with $3,050 a month in gross Social Security and pension income is over the $2,982 cap. In Florida that usually means discussing a Qualified Income Trust (Miller trust) before she applies. A married couple in Boynton Beach, where one spouse is entering a nursing home, might look at the $162,660 CSRA and the $2,705 MMMNA to see what the spouse at home may keep.

On the probate side, a family settling a modest estate after July 1, 2026 may find summary administration is now available where it was not before. Whether it fits depends on the estate and the facts.

DCF Appendix A-9, July 2026 (PDF); DCF Appendix A-9, January 2026 (archived PDF); CMS 2026 standards (PDF); Florida Senate summary of CS/HB 1337; Section 735.201, Florida Statutes

October 7, 2026

Walters, as Personal Representative v. Agency for Health Care Administration

Florida Third District Court of Appeal3D25-0817 (L.T. 18-591-CP-02)

Locator: 51 Fla. L. Weekly D2087a

What the court did

The question was whether a cooperative apartment (a “co-op,” where the owner holds shares in a corporation plus the right to occupy a unit, rather than a deed) counts as homestead. Florida homestead (the home protected by the Florida Constitution) generally cannot be forced into a sale to pay most debts of the owner’s estate. Here the estate’s main creditor was the Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA), the state agency that runs Florida Medicaid, which had filed a claim to recover Medicaid benefits paid during the owner’s life. The decedent died on August 29, 2017. In an earlier appeal in the same Miami-Dade case, the Third District held that under the statute then in force, a co-op interest was not “real property” for homestead purposes. In 2021 the Legislature amended section 719.103(25), Florida Statutes, to say that an interest in a cooperative unit is an interest in real property. The estate argued the amendment should reach back to the 2017 death. The trial court said no, and the Third District affirmed. The court noted the Legislature never called the 2021 change remedial or a clarification of existing law, so it applies going forward only. Because the co-op was not real property on the date of death, homestead protection from forced sale did not apply, and AHCA’s claim was not blocked on that ground.

Practical takeaway

The date of death, and the law in force on that day, still drives whether a co-op counts as homestead against a Medicaid estate recovery claim. A later statute does not automatically rewrite an older death. A family might assume that because the law changed in 2021, a parent’s co-op that passed before then is safe from AHCA. This opinion says that assumption can be wrong. If a parent owns a co-op, or the family expects an AHCA claim after a Medicaid recipient dies, flag the form of ownership and the date of death early.

September 23, 2026

Slightly earlier than this page’s late-September window, and still on point.

McFarlane v. Holness, as Personal Representative

Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal4D2025-2750 (L.T. 062025CP000047A001CE, Broward)

Locator: 51 Fla. L. Weekly D1959c

What the court did

A surviving spouse asked the Broward probate court to declare her late husband’s former home his constitutional homestead. Years earlier, during a prior marriage, he and his then-wife had signed an enhanced life estate deed, often called a “Lady Bird” deed. That type of deed lets the owners keep living in the home, and keep the power to sell, mortgage or lease it, while naming who receives it at death without probate. The deed was mentioned in a footnote but not attached to the spouse’s petition. On a motion to dismiss, the trial court read the deed anyway, concluded the husband held no fee interest (full ownership) at death, and dismissed the petition. The Fourth District reversed. A motion to dismiss only tests whether the petition states a claim, so the court ordinarily stays within the petition and its attachments. Weighing an unattached deed and deciding ownership and homestead rights went beyond that limited role. The case goes back for further proceedings. The appellate court expressly did not decide whether the Lady Bird deed ultimately defeats the spouse’s homestead claim.

Practical takeaway

Lady Bird deeds are common in Florida planning, and they can collide with a later marriage and with a surviving spouse’s homestead rights. A family might sign a Lady Bird deed naming the children, and then one parent remarries after the other dies. That is the moment to revisit the deed, the will and any prenuptial agreement together. This opinion is mainly procedural: a dismissal on the papers is not the end of the story. The deed’s ultimate effect remains an open question in this case.

October 23, 2026

Rivera-Wagner, as Trustee v. Wagner

Florida Sixth District Court of Appeal6D2026-2636 (L.T. 2026-CA-004081, Polk)

Locator: 51 Fla. L. Weekly D2226b

What the court did

A trustee of a living trust, who is not a lawyer, filed papers in a Polk County case “as trustee.” The circuit court ordered her to hire a lawyer for the trust and struck the filings she made without one. She asked the Sixth District to review those orders, and the court dismissed her petition. The reason: a person who is not a Florida attorney may not represent a trust in court. Doing so is the unauthorized practice of law. The trustee argued that the trust document itself prohibited lawyers from representing the trust. The court held that private trust language cannot authorize a non-lawyer to practice law, because under the Florida Constitution the Florida Supreme Court alone regulates who may practice law. The opinion follows the Sixth District’s recent decision in Gonzalez v. Lagrasse.

Practical takeaway

If you name a spouse, child or friend as trustee, plan for the trust to need a lawyer if it ever ends up in court. A family member can often handle day-to-day trust administration, such as paying bills and keeping records. Once there is a lawsuit, though, a clause saying no lawyer may represent the trust will not rescue filings made without one, and it can cost time when the matter is urgent.

October 7, 2026

MEB Loan Trust VI v. Isaacs

Florida Third District Court of Appeal3D25-1280 (L.T. 23-17090-CA-01)

Locator: 51 Fla. L. Weekly D2085a

What the court did

A lender sued in Miami-Dade circuit court to foreclose a mortgage. One record co-owner, Albert Isaacs, had signed the mortgage and had already been found totally incapacitated, with a plenary guardian of the property appointed. The guardian answered for the ward, then persuaded the trial court to dismiss Isaacs himself as a defendant, arguing that Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.260 required substituting the guardian for the ward. The Third District reversed. Rule 1.260 covers a party who dies or becomes incompetent during a lawsuit, and here the incapacity came before the suit was filed, so the rule did not apply at all. Guardianship lets the guardian manage and defend for the ward. It does not take title away from the ward or make the guardian the owner. As the record title holder, the ward is an indispensable defendant in a foreclosure and must stay in the case. The court suggested a clearer caption, such as “Albert Isaacs, a ward, by [guardian], as guardian of the property.”

Practical takeaway

Guardianship protects and manages. It does not make the ward disappear from a lawsuit about property the ward still owns. Families and guardians should expect the ward to stay named in the case, with the guardian acting on the ward’s behalf, rather than being replaced. For planning, this is one more reason many families prefer a well-drafted durable power of attorney and a preneed guardian designation, which may reduce the chance that a court-supervised guardianship is needed at all.

October 1, 2026

In re Amendments to Florida Probate Rules 5.171 and 5.205

Supreme Court of FloridaSC2026-0039

Locator: 51 Fla. L. Weekly S296a · Effective January 1, 2027, 12:01 a.m.

What the court did

The Court deleted Rule 5.171, which only repeated section 731.103, Florida Statutes, and reworked Rule 5.205 on filing evidence of death. “Evidence of death” means the proof that section 731.103 accepts, such as an official death record. Under the amended rule, opening a formal administration (the full, court-supervised type of probate) does not require filing a death certificate up front. Instead, evidence of death must be filed by the rule’s deadlines. In a formal administration, that is no later than 3 months after the first publication of the notice to creditors. In summary administration (a shorter process, generally for estates worth $150,000 or less after excluding exempt property, or where the person died more than two years earlier), it is any time before the court signs the order. A court may not require an official death record earlier than the rule allows unless there is reasonable cause to believe the person is still alive.

Practical takeaway

Families sometimes cannot get a certified death certificate right away, for example while a medical examiner’s review is pending. Starting January 1, 2027, the amended rules make clear that a missing certificate is not, by itself, a reason to block opening a probate case. The official record still has to be filed, on the rule’s schedule.

October 14, 2026

South Florida Donor Network, LLC v. In re Guardianship of Jacqueline Daley

Florida Third District Court of Appeal3D26-2178 (L.T. 25-4281-GD-02)

Locator: 51 Fla. L. Weekly D2180b

This opinion involves the end of a person’s life and a dispute about organ donation. It appears here as a planning note about timing and written wishes, not as guidance on how a contested donation should be handled.

What the court did

At about 4:30 p.m. on Friday, October 9, 2026, an organ procurement organization asked the Third District for emergency review. The day before, a circuit court had denied its emergency petition, under section 765.512, Florida Statutes, to authorize an anatomical gift (donation of organs or tissue) from a guardianship ward whose life support was about to be withdrawn. The appellate court heard argument at about 7:00 p.m. and, with no objection, temporarily stayed the lower court’s orders. The ward died that evening. The next day the court vacated the stay and dismissed the petition as moot. The opinion explains that under Florida’s anatomical gift law, when a person has not made a gift or named a health care surrogate, listed classes of people may authorize one in a set order of priority. It does not issue a lasting ruling on whether the denial was right.

Practical takeaway

Write down anatomical-gift wishes before incapacity, on a donor registry or in an advance directive, and name a health care surrogate. Once a dispute turns on hours in a guardianship court, appellate review can be overtaken by events. This note is about process and planning.

Procedure, forms, and fees

For lawyers

Rule amendments, form updates and a fee opinion. Open this if you practice in probate, guardianship or trust litigation. It is not a family guide.

Show the lawyer notes

October 1, 2026

In re Amendments to Florida Probate Rules 5.015, 5.630, and 5.648

Supreme Court of FloridaSC2025-2011

Locator: 51 Fla. L. Weekly S297a · Effective January 1, 2027, 12:01 a.m.

What the court did

Rule 5.015 adds a definition of “elisor”: a person, other than an interested person in the guardianship, whom the court designates to give notice to the alleged incapacitated person, and who may be the court-appointed attorney. Rule 5.630 (petitions for approval of acts) now requires support for the price and terms of any sale, mortgage or contract, plus statements on whether the guardian, the guardian’s relatives or anyone with a personal or professional relationship to the guardian or ward has an interest, and whether the act may be a conflict of interest or prohibited activity under section 744.446. If the court approves such an act anyway, the order must say why it serves the ward’s best interests. Rule 5.648 (emergency temporary guardian) makes the elisor responsible for serving the notice and petition on the alleged incapacitated person, and on that person’s attorney if the attorney is not the elisor, at least 24 hours before the hearing unless 24-hour notice would cause substantial harm. The elisor must also read the notice and petition to the alleged incapacitated person.

Practical takeaway

Before January 1, 2027, update emergency-temporary-guardianship and approval-of-acts templates, add the interest and conflict disclosures, and train staff on the elisor’s service and reading steps.

October 8, 2026

In re Amendments to Florida Probate Rules 5.025 and 5.080

Supreme Court of FloridaSC2026-0014

Locator: 51 Fla. L. Weekly S302a · Effective January 1, 2027, 12:01 a.m.

What the court did

The Court amended Rules 5.025 (adversary proceedings) and 5.080 (discovery and subpoena) to make clear that probate and guardianship proceedings are exempt from the initial discovery disclosure requirements in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(a)(1), (a)(3) and (a)(4). The goal is to reduce confusion where recent civil-procedure changes meet probate practice.

Practical takeaway

Do not assume a circuit-civil initial-disclosure checklist applies in a probate or guardianship file. After the effective date, cite the amended Probate Rules.

October 15, 2026

In re Amendments to Florida Probate Rules — 2026 legislation

Supreme Court of FloridaSC2026-1351

Locator: 51 Fla. L. Weekly S324a · Effective Immediately on release of the opinion

What the court did

Fast-track amendments respond to chapters 2026-85 and 2026-129, Laws of Florida, which took effect July 1, 2026. Rule 5.122, on curators, now has the court determine any bond. Notice of a curator’s appointment must also go to other interested persons, unless notice would delay the appointment and that delay creates a significant danger that property will be wasted, destroyed or removed beyond the court’s reach, in line with amended section 733.501. Rule 5.905 adds Tatton-Brown-Rahman syndrome to the developmental-disability list on guardian-advocate petition forms, in line with amended section 393.063(11). The opinion allows 75 days for comments, due on or before December 29, 2026.

Practical takeaway

Update curator petition, notice, and bond workflows now. Update guardian-advocate forms for the new syndrome listing.

October 15, 2026

In re Amendments to Florida Probate Rules (guardianship forms and accountings)

Supreme Court of FloridaSC2026-0558

Locator: 51 Fla. L. Weekly S325a · Effective January 1, 2027, 12:01 a.m.

What the court did

The amendments touch guardian accountings and objections (Rules 5.696 and 5.700) and forms 5.901 through 5.906 and 5.910: incapacity petitions, guardian petitions and orders, letters of guardianship, guardianship plans, guardian-advocate materials and inventories. Most of the change is conformity work: moving the case style under Rule 2.520, updating certificates of service to match amended Rule 2.516(f), changing “shall” to “must,” and cleaning up cross-references.

Practical takeaway

Replace local form banks, calendar the January 1, 2027 effective date, and train on the service-certificate language.

September 16, 2026

Slightly earlier than this page’s late-September window, and still on point.

Bell & Bell, P.A. v. Konidaris

Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal4D2024-2723

Locator: 51 Fla. L. Weekly D1913b

What the court did

After probate litigation in Broward County, in which one lawyer had represented both the personal representative and a beneficiary of the estate, the lawyer appealed the limits the trial court put on his fee award. The Fourth District reversed and sent the case back for a new (de novo) fee hearing, which made the clients’ cross-appeal moot. The court gave three reasons. The fee order, entered more than eight months after trial, closely tracked both sides’ written closing arguments, down to their different citation styles, which raised substantial doubt that the court had exercised independent judgment. A finding that the lawyer spent 156 hours on a related FINRA claim had no support in the record. And a deduction of $85,040 for another firm’s fees was also unsupported. The opinion is about how a fee award must be supported. It is not a consumer guide.

Practical takeaway

A fee order needs the court’s own findings and support in the record. Adopting the parties’ closing arguments wholesale, or cutting hours on a number no witness or billing record supports, invites reversal, especially where one lawyer represented clients in more than one role.

How these notes were written

These summaries are original plain-English writing for education. Florida Law Weekly and the Florida Law Weekly Supplement were used only as case-finders: captions, docket numbers and issue dates. Holdings are paraphrased from official Florida court opinions (flcourts.gov PDFs, or the Justia and FindLaw mirrors) or, for the one trial-level Supplement item, from an opinion-based paraphrase. They are not drawn from Florida Law Weekly headnotes, digests or editorial text. This page does not republish Florida Law Weekly’s paid content. Citations such as “51 Fla. L. Weekly” are locators only. This page is educational, not legal advice.

When a note falls just outside the window in which it was added, the card says so. A trial-court order is labeled as a trial court and, where the source is a Supplement posting, as a Supplement. It is not a district court opinion.

Call Solkoff Legal, P.A.

If a note here sounds like papers already in the family file, call (561) 733-4242. A call does not create an attorney-client relationship. On this site, the practice focus is elder law, Florida Medicaid long-term care planning, and estate planning.

ContactMedicaid planning guideEstate planning guide

Solkoff Legal, P.A. · (561) 733-4242
2605 West Atlantic Avenue, Suite A-103, Delray Beach, FL 33445

CallRequest consultation