would apply equally to them. 6 . Windsor's status as State & County's rein-surer has been recognized by this court and the Thirteenth Court of Appeals. State & County, 988 S.W.2d at 329; Windsor, 923 S.W.2d at 96. 7 . Although Miller raises four issues related to the sanctions order, his argument only addresses one distinct sanction complaint. Thus, we will consider only the complaint argued. See Tex.R.App. P. 38.1(e), (h); Windsor, 923 S.W.2d at 93. 8 . We do not agree with Miller’s assertion that the trial court’s order does not set forth the particulars of the good cause justifying the sanctions. The order, along with the court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law, clearly specifies the particular acts upon which the sanctions order was based. Cf. Chancey, 942 S.W.2d at 155
holding that five alleged incidents in four years were too few too separate in time and too mild  to create an abusive working environment holding merely that the evidence was sufficient to support the award of attorneys fees holding sanctions order not final where the amount of sanctions had not yet been determined holding sanctions order was too general to support award holding prayer for general relief does not support award of attorneys fees