With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". and cash advances he made, plus interest. See Dulong, 261 S.W.3d at 894; see also Butler, 2009 WL 402329, at *3. Thus, the evidence presented by Citibank establishes its right to summary judgment as a matter of law. McFarland raises no fact issues that would preclude summary judgment. Tex. Workers’ Comp. Ins. Fund v. Simon, 980 S.W.2d 730, 733 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 1998, no pet.) (citing City of Houston v. Clear Creek Basin Auth., 589 S.W.2d 671, 678 (Tex.1979)). McFarland has not presented any evidence suggesting a different amount is owed. Based on the series of transactions reflected on the account statements, we conclude Citibank established that McFarland agreed to the full amount shown on the statements and impliedly promised to pay the indebtedness. See Dulong, 261 S.W.3d at 894 (<HOLDING>). Application of Account Stated Cause of Action

A: holding promise to indemnify for credit card debts to be nondischargeable support obligation in part because if the spouse were to pay the credit card and attorneys fee debts from this monthly income her ability to meet the regular monthly family expenses would be severely impaired
B: holding to the effect that section 24 fifth has been impliedly amended by title vii
C: holding under almost identical facts that it was reasonable to infer that eredit card holder agreed to full amount shown on statements and impliedly promised to pay indebtedness
D: 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
C.