sole purpose of harassment. Along with sanctions, the Bexar County Probate Court dismissed the El Paso District Court action.with prejudice. 3.Groundless Pleadings ' Groundless pleadings have “no basis in law or fact and [are] not warranted by good faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law.” Tex. R. Crv. P. 13; Estate of Davis v. Cook, 9 S.W.3d at 297. To prevail on her motions for sanctions, Morales also had to prove either bad faith or harassment. Tex. R. Civ. P. 13 (requiring 'either “groundless and brought in bad.faith” or “groundless and brought for the purpose of harassment”); Estate of Davis v. Cook, 9 S.W.3d at 297. . Because Rule 13 does not define “bad faith” or “harassment,” we look to case law for guidance. Estate■ of Davis, 9 S.W.3d at 298 (<HOLDING>). Bad faith entails more than “simply bad
holding expert testimony is not required as a per se rule  in bad faith actions holding title company liable for bad faith recognizing rule 13⅛ silence in defining bad faith and harassment holding that a bad faith claim is a tort holding that showing of bad faith prosecution or harassment not required for issuance of injunction to prohibit relitigation