pjc-family-2024-lib

B REACH OF D UTY BY P ERSONAL R EPRESENTATIVE

PJC 232.1

PJC 232.1

Breach of Duty by Personal Representative— Other Than Self-Dealing

QUESTION ______ Did PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE fail to comply with one or more of the following duties? Answer “Yes” or “No” for each. [List duties alleged to have been breached and the standard of care applicable to each, using language from the Texas Estates Code or common law, as appropriate. See comment below.] 1. Answer: _______________ 2. Answer: _______________ 3. Answer: _______________ COMMENT When to use. The foregoing question should be used in cases in which an execu tor or administrator is accused of failing to comply with one or more of his duties but is not alleged to have engaged in any self-dealing transaction. If self-dealing is alleged, see PJC 232.2. Duties. The personal representative of an estate is held to the same high fiduciary standards in administering an estate as a trustee. Humane Society v. Austin National Bank , 531 S.W.2d 574, 577 (Tex. 1975). The source of the duties for which a personal representative may be held liable varies on a case-by-case basis: 1. The duties of a personal representative must first be drawn from the applicable statutes. For example, Tex. Est. Code § 351.101 requires that an “execu tor or administrator . . . shall take care of estate property as a prudent person would take care of that person’s own property.” Chapter 351 of the Texas Estates Code lists many other duties. Other statutes may also affect particular duties. See, for example, Tex. Prop. Code ch. 116 (Uniform Principal and Income Act). 2. The duties of a personal representative are governed by common-law principles to the extent those principles do not conflict with Texas statutes. Tex. Est. Code § 351.001. For example, a personal representative owes the common-law duty of full disclosure in addition to statutory requirements of accounting. Montgomery v. Kennedy , 669 S.W.2d 309, 313 (Tex. 1984); Geeslin v. McElhenney , 788 S.W.2d 683, 685 (Tex. App.—Austin 1990, no writ); Cartwright v. Minton , 318 S.W.2d 449 1.

241