In Charles v. Est. of Kornbacher, the estate sued a defendant regarding the ownership of real property. No. 01-23-00125-CV, 2024 Tex. App. LEXIS 2947 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] April 30, 2024, no pet. history). After the estate won, the defendant appealed, arguing that the judgment had to be reversed due to the fact that an estate is not a valid party. The court of appeals affirmed. The court noted: “A decedent’s estate ‘is not a legal entity and may not properly sue or be sued as such.’ A suit on behalf of an estate must thus be brought by the personal representative of the estate.” Id. However, “a judgment involving an estate without a named representative ‘may be valid.’” Id. While “[a]n estate itself is not a legal entity and therefore cannot sue or be sued[,] . . . if the personal representative of an estate participates in the case, the judgment involving the estate may be valid.” Id. The court noted that the level of necessary “participation” required by the personal representative is not defined and appears to be case-specific. Id. The court noted that the judgment was rendered in favor of “the Estate of Rose Kornbacher, Deceased, through its Personal Representative, Eric Roberts.” Id. And the judgment states that “the Estate Of Rose Kornbacher, through its personal representative, Eric Roberts, appeared for trial, represented by counsel who announced ‘ready’ for trial.” Id. Because portions of the record were missing, the court presumed that those omitted portions supported the trial court’s judgment and affirmed: “Given the wording of the final judgment and the lack of reporter’s record, we conclude Roberts participated in the case as the Estate’s personal representative and thus the trial court had jurisdiction to enter judgment in favor of the Estate of Rose Kornbacher, through its personal representative, Eric Roberts.” Id.