Opinion ON MOTION FOR REHEARING We submit the following to amend our holding of February 4, 1993. In that opinion, we stated
that we reformed the judgment to condition the award of appellate attorney's fees to Alkek upon the Goldmans' failure to prevail
on appeal beyond this court. The $20,000 award of attorney's fees for appeal to this Court, the $7,500 and $1,500 awarded
as attorney's fees for application for writ of error and appeal to the Supreme Court of Texas will be awarded only if the
Goldmans do not prevail on appeal in this court and beyond. We would not be understood to hold that the award of attorney's
fees for appeal to this court is conditioned on the Goldmans' failure to prevail on appeal beyond this court. The judgment
shall read that the award of appellate attorney's fees to Alkek is conditional upon the Goldmans' failure to prevail on appeal. In addition, we agree with the Goldmans' claim that they are entitled to an adjustment in the amount of appellate attorney's
fees since they were partially successful on appeal. The Goldmans successfully challenged the award of May's attorney's fees
and the trial court's unconditional award of appellate attorney's fees. An appellee is not entitled to an award of appellate
attorney's fees for that portion of fees attributable to an unsuccessful defense of the case. Southwestern Bell Tel. v. Vollmer,
805 S.W.2d 825, 834 (Tex. App.-- Corpus Christi 1991, writ denied); see also Smith v. Smith, 757 S.W.2d 422, 426 (Tex. App.--Dallas
1988, writ denied). The determination of an award of attorney's fees is a severable claim. We therefore reverse the award
of attorney's fees for appeal to this court and remand to the trial court for a determination of the reasonable amount of
appellate attorney's fees to be awarded to appellee in view of the fact that appellant was partially successful in this appeal.
The trial court's judgment is, in all other respects, affirmed.