July 7, 2009 guardianship proceeding, we must presume the evidence supports the probate court's finding.”); Sandoval v. Comm’n for Lawyer Discipline, 25 S.W.3d 720, 722 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. denied) (presuming omitted portions of record supported judgment). 7 . I recognize that other courts of appeals have, to varying degrees, followed this line of reasoning. See, e.g., D.F. v. Tex. Dep’t of Family & Protective Servs., 393 S.W.3d 821, 828 (Tex.App.-El Paso 2012, no pet. h.) (citing plain language of section 161.001(1)(O) and "a majority of other courts of appeal which have so held” in holding that "a child's removal for ‘abuse or neglect’ is a required element of Section 161.001(1)(O)”); In re S.N., 287 S.W.3d 183, 190 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2009, no pet.) (<HOLDING>); In re AAA., 265 S.W.3d 507, 515
holding that prejudice or injury is a necessary element of standing holding that abuse or neglect is required element of section 1610011o holding the connection is an element holding that materiality necessary element of section 1001 holding that sharing of profits is one evidence of partnership but not a required element