bills and attorney testimony establish the amount HP paid its attorneys but do not conclusively establish that this amount was reasonable and necessary. See Garcia, 319 S.W.3d at 642 (rejecting plaintiffs argument that his attorney’s testimony concerning reasonable attorney’s fees conclusively established amount of fees and holding that such testimony was some, but not conclusive, evidence of a reasonable fee). It is within the jury’s discretion to determine that the reasonable value of the attorneys’ services employed by HP was less than the amount billed by the attorneys. See id. Likewise, because the jury awarded HP less than the full damages it requested, the jury may have determined that this outcome warranted a lesser fee than that requested by HP. See Smith, 296 S.W.3d at 548-49 (<HOLDING>); see also Gunter, 808 S.W.2d at 166;
holding that where plaintiff sought recovery of fees against multiple defendants evidence of unsegregated fees was more than a scintilla of evidence to support fee award what a reasonable attorneys fee would be for the entire case indicates what the segregated amount  should be holding that an attorneys fees award is not appealable until the amount of the award is set holding that where a state statute provides for the award of attorneys fees those fees can be considered as part of the amount in controversy for the purpose of determining federal diversity jurisdiction holding that awarded fees were reasonable and that proof that attorneys fees are necessary apart from testimony as to the reasonableness of the fee is not required holding that court of appeals erred by rendering judgment for full amount of attorneys fees sought after reversing 0 fee award because jury awarded less in damages than amount sought and therefore uncontroverted attorney testimony on amount of attorneys fees did not establish amount of reasonable and necessary fees as a matter of law