was a party to the state-court judgment, issue preclusion and claim preclusion could apply as well. See 28 U.S.C. § 1738. Just because a claim might survive the probate exception does not mean that it will be heard in federal court or, if it is heard, that the plaintiff will get what it wants. Ultimately, the Court will deny Sandra’s motion because there is no state-court proceeding with which to interfere. But even if there were, all but one of Blair’s claims would still be safe from the probate exception for other reasons. First, breach of fiduciary duty and fraud claims like Blair’s are- routinely held to fall outside the probate exception-even when probate litigation is ongoing in state court — because they are in personam, as opposed to in rem, claims. Jones, 465 F.3d at 307-08 (<HOLDING>); Downey v. Keltz, 2012 WL 280716, *3 (N.D.Ill.
holding that texass probate statute does not affect whether the probate exception to federal jurisdiction applies to a case holding that breach of fiduciary duty claim was preempted by fehba holding that probate exception does not apply where plaintiffs assert claims for breach of fiduciary duty seek in personam jurisdiction over defendants and do not seek to probate or annul a will holding that a suit for compensatory and punitive damages against various probate judges for conspiracy to deprive the plaintiff of property during the probate proceedings was not barred by the probate exception or rookerfeldman abstention doctrine holding that breach of fiduciary claim falls outside probate exception