risk management, and health care systems and operations; and the testimony of Dr. Koch. This evidence unquestionably establishes that LMS was the “umbrella” organization over Hospital; that Hospital was to operate as a for-profit, long-term acute care specialty hospital; that per the governing board bylaws, LMS was to “review annual operating and capital budgets” of Hospital; and that per the governing board bylaws, LMS was to oversee Hospital’s budget. Chesser points to no evidence, however, and we have located none in the record, showing how the monies generated by Hospital were allocated or shared between Hospital and LMS. See St. Joseph Hosp., 94 S.W.3d at 531; David L. Smith & Assocs., L.L.P. v. Stealth Detection, Inc., 327 S.W.3d 873, 878-79 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2010, no pet.) (<HOLDING>). Similarly, the record contains no evidence of
holding legally sufficient evidence of this element existed when written agreement between members of enterprise specifically mentioned investment of substantial sums for mass transit purposes holding evidence was legally insufficient on third element of joint enterprise because although both entities of the alleged joint enterprise contemplated economic gain that gain was not shared without special or distinguishing characteristics but instead one entity passed along revenue attributable to work of the other and kept for itself revenue attributable to the work of its own drivers holding legally insufficient evidence of joint enterprise between companies existed despite evidence of shared officers directors employees business address logo and assets when no evidence existed of how or whether monetary benefits were shared between the two entities holding evidence legally insufficient holding evidence legally sufficient