Schuld v. Dembrinski, 12 S.W.3d 485 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2000, no pet.).
Heir sued Siblings in a county court at law to petition property
inherited from Intestate. Intestate’s estate had not been subject to
administration and administration was neither necessary nor
contemplated. Siblings asserted, however, that the county court at law
lacked jurisdiction and that the statutory probate court had exclusive
jurisdiction. The trial court agreed.
The appellate court vacated and ordered the case reinstated on the
county court at law’s docket. The court recognized that probate courts
typically have jurisdiction over matters incident to an estate. However,
there was no probate proceeding pending when Heir filed suit and thus
the probate court did not have jurisdiction. “[T]he pendency of a
probate proceeding is a requisite for a [probate] court’s exercise of
jurisdiction over matters related to it.” Schuld at 487. The partition
action was not a probate or administration matter which would “fall
within the expertise of a statutory probate court’s exclusive
jurisdiction. * * * The fact that the co-owners of the house and lot
derived their interests by the laws of descent and distribution or by
virtue of a will does not convert this partition suit into a
determination of heirship over which the statutory probate court might
have exclusive jurisdiction.” Schuld at 488.
Moral: “[A] court empowered with probate jurisdiction may only exercise
its probate jurisdiction over ‘matters incident to an estate’ when a
probate proceeding relating to such matter is already pending in that
court.” Schuld at 487.