In re Davidson, 485 S.W.3d 927 (Tex. App.—Tyler 2016, no pet.).
After Decedent’s death but prior to being
appointed, Executor sued Decedent’s Debtor who was in default on a real
estate lien note in Anderson County. Shortly thereafter, Executor was
successful in obtaining an order in Anderson County admitting the will
to probate and appointing him as the executor although Decedent was
domiciled in San Augustine County at the time of his death. Debtor filed
a motion to transfer the probate proceeding to San Augustine County. The
court refused and Debtor sought mandamus.
The appellate court denied mandamus relief. The
court acknowledged that mandatory venue was in San Augustine County,
Decedent’s domicile at death. Estates Code § 33.001(1). However, only an
“interested person” has standing to request a transfer of venue. Estates
Code § 33.102(a). The court held that Debtor was not an interested
person as defined by Estates Code § 22.018(1). First, Debtor was not a
creditor of the estate; Debtor owed money to the estate rather than
being entitled to money from the estate. Second, Debtor’s claim that
Executor violated the Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act
by filing in the wrong county did not make her a creditor of Decedent’s
estate but instead, merely a potential creditor of the Executor. Thus,
the court denied mandamus and held that the trial court did not abuse
its discretion when it denied Debtor’s motion to transfer venue.
Moral: An estate debtor
lacks standing to request a court to transfer a probate proceeding from
a county of improper venue to a county of proper venue.