.012(c)(2). But, section 33.012(b) provides that when a claimant has settled with a person, the court shall reduce the claimant’s damages by the dollar amount of all settlements. Id. § 33.012(b). And section 33.012(d) provides that even if a defendant in a health care liability claim forgets to, or simply fails to, make any election concerning a settlement credit, then nonetheless the dollar-for-dollar settlement credit applies. See id. § 33.012(d). So, in this case, under either subsection (b) or subsection (d), Appellees are entitled to a dollar-for-dollar settlement credit equal to $183,-000 — -the damages paid in settlement by the settling defendants. In the judgment, after application of the relevant damage cap provisions to the damages found by the jury, the trial cour ex.1995) (<HOLDING>); Shoemaker v. Estate of Clyde Whistler, 513
recognizing that evidence may be legally insufficient where there is variance between indictment allegations and proof holding evidence legally sufficient holding evidence legally insufficient holding evidence was legally insufficient to support conviction for violation of sex offender registration requirement holding evidence legally sufficient under sections d and e