home / kassab_analytics

Menu
  • Search all tables

Court Filings

68 public court filings with full text and structured metadata

Data license: Public court records

1 row where outcome = "GRANTED", party = "Pohl" and phase = "Phase 2" sorted by date descending

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

Suggested facets: date (date)

phase 1

  • Phase 2 · 1 ✖

party 1

  • Pohl · 1 ✖

outcome 1

  • GRANTED · 1 ✖

doc_type 1

  • MSJ 1
filing_id date ▲ doc_type party description doc_type_detail procedural_posture chain outcome phase filename relief_requested full_text
22 2021-12-07 MSJ Pohl Pohl’s MSJ on Kassab Counterclaims Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment on Defendants' Counterclaims for Civil Barratry Pohl's dispositive motion seeking traditional summary judgment on Kassab's counterclaims for civil barratry based on 242 assigned claims. Filed December 7, 2021, after Kassab's Fourth Amended Answer. This is the principal motion in the CC-1 chain, which was ultimately granted. Attorney: Jean C. Frizzell of Reynolds Frizzell LLP. CC-1 GRANTED Phase 2 2021-12-07_MSJ_Pohl-MSJ-on-Kassab-Counterclaims_FILED.pdf Grant summary judgment dismissing Kassab's counterclaims for civil barratry 12/7/2021 4:11 PM Marilyn Burgess - District Clerk Harris County Envelope No. 59800424 By: Ozuqui Quintanilla Filed: 12/7/2021 4:11 PM CAUSE NO. 2018-58419 MICHAEL A. POHL AND LAW OFFICE OF § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF MICHAEL A. POHL, PLLC, § Plaintiffs, § V. § k § e SCOTT FAVRE and SCOTT M. FAVRE PA, § C l LLC; PRECISION MARKETING GROUP, § HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS LLC; LANCE CHRISTOPHER KASSAB and § c LANCE CHRISTOPHER KASSAB, P.C. d/b/a § r THE KASSAB LAW FIRM; TINA § s NICHOLSON and BAKER NICHOLSON, § LLP d/b/a BAKER NICHOLSON LAW § s FIRM; and DOUGLAS MONTAGUE III and § s MONTAGUE PITTMAN & VARNADO, P.A., § Defendants. § r189TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON DEFENDANTS’ COUNTERCLAIMS Plaintiffs Michael Pohl and Law Officae of Michael A. Pohl (collectively “Pohl”) move for summary judgment on the Defendants’ counterclaims for civil barratry. SU e MMARY OF ARGUMENT Defendants Lance Christfopher Kassab and Lance Christopher Kassab, P.C., d/b/a The Kassab Law Firm (collectiveyly “Kassab”) assert counterclaims that have already been adjudicated. Kassab’s clients previoCusly brought these very claims and lost them. Kassab’ counterclaims fail because they are barred by res judicata, they are not revived by the savings provision of the Texas Civil Practice fafnd Remedies Code and are accordingly time-barred, and because the purported assignmeUnts of the claims are invalid and unenforceable. After purchasing Pohl’s stolen client lists and contact information, Kassab solicited Pohl’s clients to bring barratry claims. When courts (including this one) found those barratry claims to be barred by limitations, Kassab obtained purported “assignments” of those claims and asserted them as counterclaims in this action, contending they had been “revived” pursuant to the savings provision of Civil Practices and Remedies Code section 16.069. The statutory requirements of section 16.069 are not met for multiple reasons, and Kassab’s effort to revitalize the stale claims fails. In addition, civil barratry…

Advanced export

JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object

CSV options:

CREATE TABLE filings (
    filing_id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
    date TEXT,
    doc_type TEXT,
    party TEXT,
    description TEXT,
    doc_type_detail TEXT,
    procedural_posture TEXT,
    chain TEXT,
    outcome TEXT,
    phase TEXT,
    filename TEXT,
    relief_requested TEXT,
    full_text TEXT
);
Powered by Datasette · Queries took 9.088ms · Data license: Public court records