in lost rent in its entry of judgment. Whitmire additionally contends that Rayos’ affidavit on attorney’s fees is legally and factually insufficient because it does not include statements of the number of hours expended or the billing rate, and does not contain copies of any invoices or billing statements. We do not require an attorney to specifically state the number of hours spent on a case or the rate charged; instead, the attorney may prove the amount of work performed “by alternative methods, including evidence of what tasks were taken on behalf of the client.” Brighton Homes, Inc. v. McAdams, 737 S.W.2d 340, 344 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1987, writ refd n.r.e.); see also Hugh Wood Ford, Inc. v. Galloway, 830 S.W.2d 296, 298 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1992, writ denied) (<HOLDING>). Here, Rayos describes in detail the type of
holding merely that the evidence was sufficient to support the award of attorneys fees recognizing that the idea bars an award of attorneys fees for work performed subsequent to a settlement offer of all requested relief holding attorneys testimony on all work performed sufficient to support attorneys fees award even though no time records presented holding prayer for general relief does not support award of attorneys fees holding trial court had no authority to award attorneys fees when arbitrator had stated he would not award attorneys fees