rate. SES has failed to raise a fact issue that it suffered any damages as a foreseeable result of the City’s alleged breach. See Swanson, 2008 WL 22945646, at *3 (affirming defendant’s summary judgment on ground that plaintiffs damages did not result from defendant’s alleged breach); see also Stuart, 964 S.W.2d at 921. The 00812 and 00813 prevailing rates provided by the City were minimum rates. For each rate, the contract expressly specified that an employer may pay more than the proscribed amount. The Texas Government Code also states that it does not prohibit the payment of an amount greater than the general prevailing rate to a worker employed on public work. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 2258.025; see also Houston Gulf Coast Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council, 710 S.W.2d at 183 (<HOLDING>). A duty to provide a correct minimum rate does
holding that with respect to the eaja the local or national market rate for legal services cannot be a special factor used to increase the rate beyond the statutory rate holding that the proper rate for prejudgment interest is the rate fixed by the parties in a contract holding that federal prevailing wage rate statutes requirement that contractor pay not less specified minima presupposes possibility that successful bidder may have to pay higher rate to workers and that bidders reliance on governments representation of prevailing rate in computing its bid cannot be said to have been justified holding that the purpose of predecessor texas wage rate statute was to ensure that workers on public projects receive not less than prevailing rate holding that the flsa does not prohibit changes in wage rates it prohibits the payment of overtime at less than one and onehalf times the regular wage rate