and definitely a great purchase price.” The letter further indicates that other houses on the market in the subdivision were priced at “an average of $95.98 per square foot” and other “comparable properties” were priced at “an average of $94.50 a square foot.” While the letter was evidence that the price per square foot was a of the property’s fair market value as represented, at a time when Matheus believed the house contained 4,218 square feet. Under either. the benefit-of-the-bargain or the out-of-pocket measure of damages, the plaintiff is also required to prove the fair market value of the item as received. W.O. Bankston Nissan, 754 S.W.2d at 128; Jabri v. Alsayyed, 145 S.W.3d 660, 667 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.); see Ford Motor Co., 125 S.W.3d at 799, 803 (<HOLDING>); Barraza, 933 S.W.2d at 170 (holding evidence
holding testimony of owner referring to personal rather than market value irrelevant and no evidence even absent objection holding that if repairs to a firedamaged vehicle with parts of like kind and quality would not restore the vehicle to its former market value the proper measure of damages was the difference in market value before and after the loss holding parties negotiated price of vehicle was evidence of market value as represented holding that there was no evidence of market value where owners testimony affirmatively showed that it was based on personal value holding recovery precluded absent evidence of market value of vehicle when received