was legally insufficient to prove lost profits). They also argue there was undisputed evidence that she retained the shares, sold assets of the company, and kept the proceeds for herself. When examining a legal-sufficiency challenge, we review the evidence in the light most favorable to the challenged finding and indulge very reasonable inference that would support it. City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802, 822 (Tex.2005). We credit favorable evidence if reasonable jurors could and disregard contrary evidence unless reasonable jurors could not. Id. at 827. The evidence is legally sufficient if it would enable reasonable and fair-minded people to reach the verdict under review. Id. When examining a factual-sufficie , Inc., 744 S.W.2d 945, 949 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1987, writ denied) (<HOLDING>), Here, the jury was instructed that the
holding that where the customary measure of damages for a vendors failure or refusal to convey land was inapplicable the measure of damages must be flexible enough to vary with the necessities of the situation holding that the proper measure of damages was the present value of all unaccrued payments that the plaintiff would have received if the contract had been performed holding failure to raise issue of improper measure of damages in trial court waived review of complaints that proper measure of damages was not submitted to jury and that plaintiff failed to present evidence on the proper measure holding in conflict of laws analysis that it was proper to apply the law of the state of washington as to the measure of damages which involved the substantive rights of the parties holding that the proper measure of damages to repair defects for a building contract that has not been substantially performed is the contractually agreed upon measure of damages