he maintains that public policy supports this position. A negligence cause of action has three elements: (1) a legal duty owed by one person to another, (2) a breach of that duty, and (3) damages proximately caused by the breach. D. Houston, Inc. v. Love, 92 S.W.3d 450, 454 (Tex.2002). The threshold inquiry in a negligence case is duty. Centeq Realty, Inc. v. Siegler, 899 S.W.2d 195, 197 (Tex.1995); Mathis v. RKL Design/Build, 189 S.W.3d 839, 844 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.). The existence of duty is a question of law fo judgment s ry duty to persons who claim an interest in a decedent’s non-testamentary property; to them, she owes no legal duty of care. See In re Ernst, No. 04-10-00319-CV, 2011 WL 192654 (Tex.App.-San Antonio Jan. 12, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.) (<HOLDING>). Historically, some courts of appeals have
holding that executor and administratrix of estates were bound by arbitration provisions adopted by decedents because those representatives  stand  in the shoes of the decedent  in wrongful death actions holding decedents death did not arise out of her employment due to lack of causal connection between work and death since nature of work did not increase risk she would be slain by criminal act holding that decedents daughter was necessary party to maryland wrongful death action holding that plaintiffs failure to prove decedents death was caused by the wrongful acts of the defendant precludes any recovery of wrongful death damages under mississippis wrongful death statute holding that executor owed no legal duty under negligence theory to decedents sons who claimed bank accounts upon her death under a right of survivorship but were not beneficiaries of any of decedents property under her will