Legal Theories

509 claims, defenses, counterclaims, and affirmative defenses

Data license: Public court records

3 rows where filing_id = 17 and role = "defense"

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

theory_id ▼ filing_id theory party role basis
154 17 17 Limitations Rebuttal — Separate Accrual for Each Defendant Pohl defense Claims against Kassab accrued from his specific conduct (November 2016 purchase and subsequent use), not from prior conduct of others. Each possession is a new conversion. TUTSA accrues upon commercial use. Kassab must conclusively establish accrual and negate the discovery rule, which he has not done.
155 17 17 Res Judicata Rebuttal — No Privity, Different Subject Matter Pohl defense Kassab was not a party to the Federal Court Case. Under Texas three-part privity test, mere allegations of conspiracy are insufficient. Kassab provides no evidence of control, representation of interests, or successor-in-interest status. The factual bases differ: Federal Counterclaim addressed conversion of funds (billing fraud), not theft of confidential information.
156 17 17 Attorney Immunity Rebuttal — No Attorney-Client Relationship; Conduct Outside Scope Pohl defense Kassab had no clients when he purchased stolen information. His conduct of buying stolen property is not uniquely lawyerly. The doctrine requires both scope of representation and attorney-client relationship at the time of conduct. Solicitation preceding the 'meeting of the minds' cannot be within scope of client representation. Kassab provided no evidence of an attorney-client relationship at the time of wrongful conduct.

Advanced export

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

CSV options: 

CREATE TABLE legal_theories (
    theory_id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT,
    filing_id INTEGER REFERENCES filings(filing_id),
    theory TEXT,
    party TEXT,
    role TEXT,
    basis TEXT
);