City of Weatherford v. Catron, 83 S.W.3d 261, 272-73 (Tex.App.Fort Worth 2002, no pet.) 8 . Hagedorn v. Tisdale, 73 S.W.3d 341, 353 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 2002, no pet.); see also Hays & Martin, L.L.P. v. Ubinas-Brache, 192 S.W.3d 631, 636 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2006, pet. denied), and Burnside Air Conditioning & Heating, Inc. v. T.S. Young Corp., 113 S.W.3d 889, 897-98 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2003, no pet.). 9 . Residential Dynamics, LLC v. Loveless, 186 S.W.3d 192, 198 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2006, no pet.); Haynes v. City of Beaumont, 35 S.W.3d 166, 178 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2000, no pet.). 10 . Jones v. American Airlines, Inc., 131 S.W.3d 261, 271 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2004, no pet.). 11 . See Columbia Rio Grande Reg’l Hosp. v. Stover, 17 S.W.3d 387, 397-98 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 2000, no pet.) (<HOLDING>); see also Farley v. Farley, 731 S.W.2d 733,
holding evidence which was similar to the evidence offered here to be factually sufficient to support an award of attorneys fees holding that a public administrator was not entitled to attorneys fees in a claim against the estate of a former guardian where the case was not one where attorneys fees were authorized and there was no evidence to support the award holding merely that the evidence was sufficient to support the award of attorneys fees holding that an award of attorneys fees under supreme court rule 38 precursor to rule 222 did not preempt an award of attorneys fees to which one is otherwise entitled and thus appellant could seek an award of attorneys fees pursuant to section 1577300 which permits an award of fees for a party prevailing in an action against a state agency holding attorneys testimony on all work performed sufficient to support attorneys fees award even though no time records presented