§ 15.031.Executor; Administrator; Guardian

A permissive provision, so it adds counties rather than restricting the choice. It contains two distinct rules.

First: a suit against an executor, administrator, or guardian, as such, to establish a money demand against the estate they represent, may be brought in the county where the estate is administered.

Second, and easily missed: a suit against such a representative growing out of a negligent act or omission of the person whose estate is represented may be brought in the county where that negligent act or omission occurred.

The second rule is the useful one for a tort plaintiff. Where someone caused a collision and then died, their estate can be sued where the collision happened — not only where the probate court sits.

The phrase "as such" matters. It means the representative is sued in their representative capacity on an estate obligation, not personally. A claim against the same person for their own conduct is an ordinary claim under the general rules.

The county of administration is where the assets are marshalled, the claims are processed, and the court supervising the estate sits, so allowing suit there is a convenience for everyone.

But the conflicts provision limits this section by name. Where the claim is for personal injury, death, or property damage and chapter 15 conflicts with the Estates Code, this chapter controls — so a tort claim does not get pulled into the administration county merely because a representative is the defendant.