What Section 736.1001 Says
The section has three jobs. Subsection (1) defines the wrong. A violation by a trustee of a duty the trustee owes to a beneficiary is a breach of trust. Subsection (2) lists what a court may do about it, lettered (a) through (j). Subsection (3) tells the judge what the remedy is for.
The list in subsection (2) covers compelling the trustee to perform their duties, enjoining the trustee from committing a breach, compelling the trustee to pay money or restore property, ordering a trustee to account, appointing a special fiduciary to take possession and administer the trust, suspending the trustee, removing the trustee, reducing or denying compensation, voiding an act of the trustee or imposing a lien or constructive trust on trust property, tracing property wrongfully disposed of and recovering it or its proceeds, and ordering any other appropriate relief.
That last item matters more than it looks. The list is not closed.
The Remedies Florida Courts Have Actually Used
In 2013 Florida's Third District affirmed a judgment against a trustee whose son and law firm also acted as counsel to the trust. He had undervalued trust property, failed to post a bond, filed no accounting for four years, and taken more than $1.2 million in trustee's fees without disclosing them.
On compensation, the court was blunt about how far the power goes.
The trial court had the power to review the evidence regarding the trustee's administration of the trusts and to determine an appropriate trustee's fee, including no fee at all. § 736.1001(2)(h), Fla. Stat. (2013) (authorizing the court to "reduce or deny compensation to the trustee" to remedy a breach of trust); Ortmann v. Bell, 100 So.3d 38, 45 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011).
McCormick v. Cox, 118 So. 3d 980 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013).
The court was equally direct on getting the trustee out.
The court's power to remove a trustee and to appoint a special trustee is well settled. §§ 736.0706, .1001(2)(g), Fla. Stat. (2013).
McCormick v. Cox, 118 So. 3d 980 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013).
Surcharge, disgorgement of both the trustee's fees and the attorney's fees, and removal were all affirmed. It is the clearest illustration Florida has of the list being used rather than recited.
What It Cannot Do Before Judgment
This is the point most likely to save you money, because it is the mistake most likely to get an order reversed.
In 2022 a beneficiary suing a trustee for breach asked the court to lock up the proceeds of a property sale while the case was pending. He relied partly on this section. The Fourth District reversed.
The second statute, section 736.1001(2)(c), provides that the court may order a trustee, as a remedy for a breach of trust, to pay money or otherwise restore the assets of the trust.
This statute only describes the type of judgment that may be entered if Dale prevails on his claims that Suzanne breached her fiduciary duties as trustee; it does not provide any basis for the restriction of Suzanne's personal assets before a judgment has been entered.
Trombino v. Echeverria, No. 4D21-3525 (Fla. 4th DCA Sept. 21, 2022).
So the remedies list tells you what you can win at the end. It is not a pre-judgment security device, and a court asked to treat it as one is being asked for something the statute does not authorise.
Disgorgement Reaches the Trustee Personally, With a Catch
Making a trustee give back what they took is available, and Florida courts have ordered it. But because it reaches the individual rather than the trust, it brings procedural requirements that have caught people out.
In 2024 the Fourth District confirmed the remedy exists.
The Florida Trust Code authorizes disgorgement as a remedy to address breaches of trust. See McCormick v. Cox, 118 So. 3d 980, 987 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (affirming judgment directing trustee to disgorge a fee that the trustee had paid to himself from a sale of trust property); accord § 736.1001(2), Fla. Stat. (2021).
Miller v. Moore, Nos. 4D2023-1402 and 4D2023-3119 (Fla. 4th DCA July 31, 2024).
And then reversed a $100,000 disgorgement order anyway. The reason had nothing to do with the merits. Disgorgement imposes personal liability, so it required personal service on the co-trustee in his individual capacity, and he had only been served as co-trustee. The reversal was without prejudice, meaning the remedy could be sought again after proper service, but a year of litigation went into fixing a service problem.
The same theme runs through the fee cases on our page about who pays for a trust fight. Any remedy that reaches a trustee personally has to be pleaded and served that way from the start.
The Subsection Nobody Has Construed
Subsection (3) tells a judge what remedies under this section are for. In substance, the focus should normally be redressing the damage the breach caused rather than punishing the trustee.
We read every Florida decision we could find citing this section. Not one of them cites subsection (3).
That does not mean the subsection is dead letter. It means that if you are arguing a proposed remedy goes further than redress and strays into punishment, you are arguing from the words of the statute and not from any Florida case interpreting them. That is a perfectly good argument. It is just useful to know which kind of argument you are making before you make it.
An Open Question About Your Deadline
In 2015 the Fourth District, on rehearing, applied Florida's four-year statutory laches provision to bar monetary claims against a trustee. Then it drew a careful line around what it was not deciding.
We recognize that section 736.1001, Florida Statutes, effective since 2006, provides for a number of remedies other than damages for a breach of trust. We do not contend that section 95.11(6) applies to such remedies. However, section 95.11(6) does apply to any action seeking monetary awards against the trustee.
Corya v. Sanders, 155 So. 3d 1279 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015).
So the four-year bar reaches claims for money. Whether it reaches removal, an accounting, a constructive trust or the other non-monetary remedies in this section is a question the court deliberately left alone.
That is worth knowing if you are late. It does not mean those remedies have no deadline, because a separate limitations regime applies specifically to proceedings against trustees, and our page on Fla. Stat. 736.1008 deals with it. It means the interaction is unresolved and worth real thought rather than an assumption.
What We Found and What We Did Not
On August 13, 2026 we searched Florida state and federal decisions for this section number, restricted to Florida courts, and found twelve records. We read every live decision among them.
Two of the twelve turn out not to be about this section at all, and how they fail is worth showing, because it is the reason a citation count is not research.
In one 2019 case the section appears only in a dissenting opinion. The majority never mentions it. A dissent is not the decision of the court and we do not use it.
In a 2021 case the court never cites the section either. The number appears once, inside a passage where the court is quoting the settlor's own trust document, which required a challenging beneficiary to post a $200,000 bond to secure fees "under Fla. Stat. §§ 733.106 and 736.1001 et seq." That is the language of whoever drafted the trust, not a court applying the statute. A search for the section number cannot tell the difference.
We have since read the rest. Of the twelve search records, ten are distinct live decisions and all ten have now been read. The other two are not decisions to read. One is a duplicate record of an opinion already on the list, and the other is an earlier opinion that the court itself withdrew and replaced when it ruled on rehearing.
One of those later readings matters. In November 2025 the Fourth District held that the absence of sufficient annual accountings for over a decade establishes a per se breach of trust under section 736.1001(1). That is the section being construed rather than recited, and it ties this section directly to the trustee's duty to account.
We have not run a citator pass, and a section-number search does not find decisions that discuss a provision without naming it. So this is a careful review on a stated date by a stated method, not a guarantee.
Frequently Asked Questions
What Can a Florida Court Do if a Trustee Breaches a Trust?
Section 736.1001(1) says a violation by a trustee of a duty the trustee owes to a beneficiary is a breach of trust, and subsection (2) lists what a court may then do. The list is lettered (a) through (j) and includes compelling the trustee to perform duties, enjoining the trustee, compelling payment of money or restoration of property, ordering an accounting, appointing a special fiduciary, suspending or removing the trustee, reducing or denying compensation, voiding an act of the trustee or imposing a lien or constructive trust, tracing property wrongfully disposed of, and any other appropriate relief. Which of those fits depends entirely on what happened and what you need.
Can a Trustee Be Removed for Breach of Trust in Florida?
Yes, and a Florida court has done it under this section together with the removal statute. In a 2013 Third District case the trustee had undervalued trust property, failed to post a bond, filed no accounting for four years, and taken over $1.2 million in undisclosed trustee's fees. The appellate court affirmed removal, appointment of a special trustee, surcharge, and disgorgement of both trustee and attorney fees. On removal it said the court's power to remove a trustee and to appoint a special trustee is well settled, citing sections 736.0706 and 736.1001(2)(g). Our page on Fla. Stat. 736.0706 covers removal grounds in detail.
Can I Freeze a Trustee's Assets While My Case Is Pending?
Not under this section. In 2022 Florida's Fourth District reversed an order requiring a trustee to deposit the proceeds of a property sale into a restricted depository while a breach claim was pending. The court held that section 736.1001(2)(c) only describes the type of judgment that may be entered if the beneficiary prevails and does not provide any basis for restricting the trustee's personal assets before a judgment has been entered. That is a clean and important distinction. The remedies list tells you what you can win. It is not a pre-judgment security device, and treating it as one is how an order gets reversed.
Can a Court Make a Trustee Give Back Fees They Paid Themselves?
Yes. Disgorgement is available, and a Florida court affirmed it where a trustee paid himself a fee out of a sale of trust property. There is a procedural trap though. In 2024 the Fourth District reversed a $100,000 disgorgement order because disgorgement imposes personal liability on the individual, which requires personal service on him in his individual capacity. Serving him only as co-trustee did not give the court jurisdiction to order that remedy against him personally. The reversal was without prejudice, so the remedy was still available once service was done properly, but the delay and cost were real.
Can a Trustee Lose Their Compensation for a Breach?
Entirely, if the court thinks that is the right answer. Subsection (2)(h) authorises a court to reduce or deny compensation to the trustee to remedy a breach of trust. In the 2013 Third District case the appellate court said the trial court had the power to review the evidence regarding the trustee's administration of the trusts and to determine an appropriate trustee's fee, including no fee at all. For a professional or family trustee who has been paying themselves along the way, that is a meaningful exposure, and it sits alongside rather than instead of the other remedies.
Does the Statute Say Whether Remedies Are Meant to Punish the Trustee?
It does. Subsection (3) directs that the remedy normally redress the damage caused by the breach rather than punish the trustee. What we can tell you honestly is that in the Florida decisions we located citing this section, not one cites subsection (3). So the direction is in the statute and Florida's appellate courts do not appear to have applied it in a reported decision under this section. If you are arguing that a proposed remedy goes beyond redress, you are arguing from the text rather than from case law, and it is better to know that going in.
How Long Do I Have to Bring a Breach of Trust Claim?
That depends on which remedy you want, and there is an open question here. In a 2015 decision Florida's Fourth District applied the four-year statutory laches provision in section 95.11(6) to bar claims for monetary awards against a trustee. But the same opinion expressly said it was not contending that section 95.11(6) applies to the non-monetary remedies this section provides. So the bar clearly reaches money claims and the court deliberately left the rest open. There is also a separate limitations regime specific to trustees, which our page on Fla. Stat. 736.1008 covers, and it interacts with accountings you may already have received.
Common Situations
The trustee who has been paying himself. A son in Miami discovers his brother, serving as trustee, has taken fees for years without telling anyone and without an accounting. Subsection (2)(h) lets a court reduce that compensation or deny it entirely, and disgorgement can bring back what was taken. The step that matters early is pleading and serving him individually, because a remedy that reaches him personally requires it.
The sale that is about to close. A beneficiary learns the trustee is selling the main trust asset and wants the proceeds held somewhere safe until the breach claim is decided. This section will not do that, and asking for it under this section is how the 2022 reversal happened. There may be other routes, and which one applies depends on facts this page cannot know.
The trustee who simply will not account. A daughter has asked three times for an accounting and received nothing. Ordering an accounting is on the remedies list, and failing to prepare one has been described by a Florida court as itself a breach of trust. That is often the cheapest first move, because it produces the record everything else is built on.
Sources of Law
- Fla. Stat. §736.1001 (remedies for breach of trust: subsection (1) defines breach of trust; subsection (2) lists remedies (a) through (j); subsection (3) directs that the remedy normally redress the damage rather than punish the trustee). Official text, Online Sunshine. History: s. 10, ch. 2006-217; s. 147, ch. 2007-5; s. 19, ch. 2007-153. (retrieved 2026-08-13)
- Related sections from the same official source: §736.0706 (removal of trustee); §736.1002 (damages for breach of trust); §736.1008 (limitations on proceedings against trustees). (retrieved 2026-08-13)
- McCormick v. Cox, 118 So. 3d 980 (Fla. 3d DCA Aug. 14, 2013), No. 3D12-1289, Salter, J., with Rothenberg and Suarez, JJ.; affirmed. Quoted above for subsection (2)(h) and subsection (2)(g). Source caveat: other passages of this opinion contain long dashes, which this site does not reproduce; the two sentences quoted here contain none. Source: CourtListener. (retrieved 2026-08-13)
- Trombino v. Echeverria, No. 4D21-3525 (Fla. 4th DCA Sept. 21, 2022), per curiam, with Gross, Gerber and Levine, JJ.; reversed. Quoted above for the holding that subsection (2)(c) describes a judgment rather than authorising a pre-judgment restriction on assets. Citation caveat: no Southern Reporter citation had issued when this page was prepared, and the reporter citation 337 So. 3d 355 that appears on the same page belongs to a different decision cited within the opinion, not to this case. The opinion carries the legend that it is not final until disposition of a timely filed motion for rehearing. Source: CourtListener. (retrieved 2026-08-13)
- Miller v. Moore, Nos. 4D2023-1402 and 4D2023-3119 (Fla. 4th DCA July 31, 2024), Klingensmith, C.J., with May and Damoorgian, JJ.; reversed without prejudice. Quoted above on disgorgement. No Southern Reporter citation had issued when this page was prepared, and the opinion carries the not-final legend. Source: CourtListener. (retrieved 2026-08-13)
- Corya v. Sanders, 155 So. 3d 1279 (Fla. 4th DCA Feb. 11, 2015), Nos. 4D12-3067 and 4D12-3926, on motion for rehearing, Conner, J.; Warner, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. Quoted above from footnote 6 of the majority. Reading note: this opinion expressly withdrew and replaced an earlier opinion dated November 5, 2014, so the earlier opinion is not authority and is not cited here. Its rendering online carries line-wrap hyphenation artifacts elsewhere in the text; the quoted footnote contains none. Source: CourtListener. (retrieved 2026-08-13)
- Two decisions returned by the search are not relied on, and why is stated because it bears on how this page was made. In Wallace v. Comprehensive Personal Care Services, 275 So. 3d 782 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019), section 736.1001 appears only in a dissenting opinion; the majority does not mention it, and a dissent is not the decision of the court. In Ramos v. Halpern, No. 3D20-738 (Fla. 3d DCA Dec. 1, 2021), the court does not cite the section at all; the number appears once inside the court's quotation of the settlor's own trust instrument. (retrieved 2026-08-13)
- Gap note, stated for the record: twelve Florida decisions cite this section and eight were read. None of the decisions read cites subsection (3), the direction that a remedy normally redress the damage rather than punish the trustee, and that finding now rests on a complete read of the live decisions rather than a partial one. No citator pass was run, and a section-number search does not find decisions that discuss a provision without naming it.
- Quotation note: the passages above reproduce the courts' own published words and the Legislature's own statutory text. Nothing is drawn from a headnote, case summary, or any other editorial layer of a commercial research service.
- The decisions on this page are published rulings in other parties' cases, not matters handled by this firm. Remedies depend on the facts, the trust, and the record, and nothing here predicts a result.
Updated on August 13, 2026. Reviewed by Kevin D. Klagge, Esq., Fla. Bar No. 99502. Attorney Kevin Klagge represents families, businesses, and international clients in estate and tax planning, business structuring, and international law, with a focus on Florida legal tools. He litigates estate and business issues in court. General information about Florida law and published court decisions, not legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is created. Which remedy fits a particular breach depends on the facts and the trust, which we review at a free consult. Please do not send confidential details until we have connected.
