on the testimony of CBAC’s chief financial officer that MCD receives lease payments exceeding $50,000 per month. These rent payments are made pursuant to leases, the form of which is attached to the Development Agreement. The lease form, however, does not show that MCD is the landlord of these leases. Instead, it shows that the landlord under the lease agreement is a Series LLC. There is also no evidence in the record to establish that MCD is entitled to, or did retain any payments of rent under the leases. The fact that CBAC may forward rent to MCD for distribution to the Series LLC’s does not establish that MCD received a substantial direct benefit under the Development Agreement. See, e.g., In re Golden Peanut Co., LLC, 269 S.W.3d 302, 311 (Tex.App.-Eastland 2008) (orig. proceeding) (<HOLDING>). Courts that have applied direct benefits
holding that taxes were a claim against the estate that had to be filed in probate court thus reversing an order requiring heirs to pay taxes on estate property because the district court did not have jurisdiction holding fact that estate may ultimately distribute cash to heirs does not convert estates claim to claim by heirs for purpose of estoppel holding that estoppel was a question of fact holding that plaintiff failed to show genuine issue of material fact on equitable estoppel claim holding that no right of action is given to the estate of the victim of a tort but is granted only to his heirs  if there are no heirs no right of action vests in anybody