Legal Theories

509 claims, defenses, counterclaims, and affirmative defenses

Data license: Public court records

13 rows where filing_id = 50, party = "Kassab" and role = "affirmative_defense"

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

theory_id ▼ filing_id theory party role basis
359 50 50 Grievance immunity under Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure Rule 17.09 Kassab affirmative_defense Absolute and unqualified immunity for filing grievances. Pohl's claims are predicated upon Kassab's filing of grievances against Pohl. Extends to 'all actions at law or in equity.' Even allegations of wrongdoing done in connection with prosecution of disciplinary actions are absolutely immune.
360 50 50 Judicial proceedings privilege Kassab affirmative_defense Absolute privilege covers statements in judicial proceedings and communications preliminary to proposed proceedings. Pohl's claims arise from Kassab's solicitation letters (pre-suit) and barratry litigation (judicial). The privilege extends beyond defamation when the 'essence of a claim is damages that flow from communications made in the course of a judicial proceeding.'
361 50 50 Attorney immunity (Cantey Hanger / Youngkin / Taylor doctrine) Kassab affirmative_defense Attorney immune from liability to nonclients for conduct within scope of representation. Even criminal conduct not categorically excepted. Texas Supreme Court's Taylor v. Tolbert (2022) held that even conduct 'prohibited by statute' is subject to immunity if statute doesn't expressly abrogate it. Court of appeals already found Kassab's conduct 'arose out of a commercial transaction involving legal services.'
362 50 50 Statute of limitations — TUTSA (3-year bar) Kassab affirmative_defense TUTSA requires suit within 3 years of discovery. Pohl testified he discovered misappropriation in summer 2014. Suit filed August 2018 — over 4 years later. Alternatively, May 2015 accrual from Nicholson correspondence still expired by May 2018, 3 months before suit. TUTSA explicitly precludes continuing tort theories.
363 50 50 Statute of limitations — Conversion (2-year bar) Kassab affirmative_defense Two-year limitation period runs from time of unlawful taking. Whether accrued in 2014 or 2015, more than two years passed before August 2018 filing.
364 50 50 Statute of limitations — Conspiracy (derivative) Kassab affirmative_defense Civil conspiracy claim shares accrual and limitations period of underlying tort (Agar Corp.). Because conversion and TUTSA claims are time-barred, conspiracy claim is also barred.
365 50 50 TUTSA failure — trade secrets not actually kept secret Kassab affirmative_defense Arnold testified contracts kept in unsecured storage shed and her home. 10,000-11,000 contracts rejected and discarded. No confidentiality agreements with anyone. Information shared via BP portal with multiple lawyers. PMG employees testified nothing was kept confidential. Adopts Nicholson Motion arguments.
366 50 50 TUTSA failure — Pohl does not own the alleged trade secrets Kassab affirmative_defense Client files belong to the client, not the attorney under Texas law (In re George, In re McCann). Client lists were PMG's work product. Favre testified he voluntarily gave information to Kassab. Pohl's counsel told Favre he didn't care what Favre did with it.
367 50 50 Unlawful acts doctrine / illegality defense Kassab affirmative_defense Pohl's barratry is inextricably intertwined with his claims. Cannot recover damages flowing from his own illegal conduct. Texas courts applied this to barratry in Truyen Luong v. McAllister. Trade secrets obtained through illegal activity cannot receive protection (Alderson).
368 50 50 Unlawful acts — unauthorized practice of law Kassab affirmative_defense Pohl practiced law without license in Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, and Florida. Assisted non-lawyer runners in UPL. Texas courts bar recovery for unlicensed practice even if illegality not the direct cause of injury (Denson, M.M.M. v. Mitchell, Farha v. Elam).
369 50 50 Unlawful acts — trade secrets not protectable due to illegality Kassab affirmative_defense Cannot receive trade secret protection for information about ongoing illegal activities (Alderson). Whistleblower privilege to disclose another's trade secret when information relevant to commission of crime or tort (Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition § 40).
370 50 50 Judicial estoppel from Mississippi Litigation positions Kassab affirmative_defense Pohl argued in Mississippi Litigation that runner agreements were illegal and unenforceable. He should be estopped from taking a contrary position here. As Pohl himself argued, allowing him to 'play fast and loose with the Court' would 'negatively impact the reputation of the judicial system.'
371 50 50 Impermissible damages — attorney's fees from barratry defense (American Rule) Kassab affirmative_defense Texas follows the American Rule: no fee recovery without statute or contract. TUTSA does not guarantee fee recovery (discretionary under § 134A.005). Texas Supreme Court has not adopted 'tort of another' exception. Even if exception applied, Pohl is not 'wholly innocent.' Cheatham suit ongoing, making fee claim premature.

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
);