Plaintiffs are. entitled to recover at least what Whittington himself gained through his fraud. “[U]nder Texas law, a trustee may be required to forfeit any gains received while engaging in self-dealing involving trust property.” Lee v. BMCY, Inc., No. 3-01-CV-1262-BD, 2002 WL 81045979 (N.D.Tex. Sept. 11, 2002) (citing Johnson v. Brewer & Pritchard, P.C., 73 S.W.3d 193, 200-01 (Tex.2002), Burrow v. Arce, 997 S.W.2d 229, 237-39 (Tex.1999), and Slay v. Burnett Trust, 143 Tex. 621, 187 S.W.2d 377, 389 (1945)); see also Daniel v. Falcon Interest Realty Corp., 190 S.W.3d 177, 187 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2005, no pet.) (“A fiduciary must account for, and yield to the beneficiary, any profit he makes as a result of his breach of fiduciary duty.”); Crenshaw, 611 S.W.2d at 890-91 (<HOLDING>); Restatement (Third) of Restitution and Unjust
holding only a party to the partnership agreement can breach it and be liable for a breach of fiduciary duty relating to partnership obligations holding that monetary damages may be awarded in a  1132a3 claim because when sought as a remedy for breach of fiduciary duty restitution is properly regarded as an equitable remedy because the fiduciary concept is equitable holding that equitable restitution is available but that legal restitution is not holding that the record here fails to establish the first two elements which the court identified as the duty of care and a breach of that duty and as a result a directed verdict  on the issue of liability was warranted holding that the fact that no harm was suffered as a result of the breach of duty is immaterial because a selfdealing fiduciary faces strict liability ordering equitable restitution of contributions to partnership