Not consistent, not conclusive

“In a legal sufficiency analysis, we cannot ignore conflicts in the evidence, even where the conflict is within a party’s own exhibits. Here, there is a conflict between Exhibit 88 and Exhibit 7, the draw receipts. During closing argument, appellants argued: ‘Every time money was drawn [Bresnahan] got Mr. Kidwell to sign another little receipt-type note. So if you look at Exhibit 7, I think there’s 43 of them. So ever[y] draw he got him to sign.’ The problem is that there are forty-seven such draws listed in Exhibit 88 but only thirty eight draw receipts in Exhibit 7. The missing draw receipts, including interest and fees, and the “other deficient notes” together accounted for $569,344 on Exhibit 88.” Haddington Fund, LP v. Kidwell, No. 05-19-01202 (Jan. 12, 2022) (mem. op.) (citations omitted). h