Legal Theories
Data license: Public court records
8 rows where filing_id = 59 and party = "Kassab"
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
| theory_id ▼ | filing_id | theory | party | role | basis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 415 | 59 59 | Non-unanimous jury finding bars exemplary damages (Tex. R. Civ. P. 292; Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 41.003(d)) | Kassab | defense | Exemplary damages can only be awarded if jury was unanimous in finding both liability and amount; presiding juror did not sign unanimity certificate for Q17; general certificate shows ten jurors, not unanimous |
| 416 | 59 59 | Attorneys' fees not recoverable as 'actual loss' under TUTSA (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 134A.004) | Kassab | defense | TUTSA 'actual loss' is limited to lost profits, lost customers, lost market share per uniform interpretation; attorneys' fees in other litigation are not actual damages; pre-TUTSA Texas law likewise limited damages to lost profits, investor value, development costs, royalties |
| 417 | 59 59 | Tort of another doctrine not viable in Texas; even if viable, requires wholly innocent plaintiff | Kassab | defense | Never embraced by Texas Supreme Court; flatly rejected by Fourteenth Court of Appeals; multiple intermediate courts have refused to adopt it; jury found in Q3 that Pohl's wrongful conduct contributed to injury, negating wholly innocent requirement |
| 418 | 59 59 | Grievance immunity under Tex. R. Disc. P. 17.09 | Kassab | defense | Absolute and unqualified immunity for persons filing grievances bars recovery of $112,286 in attorneys' fees for defending grievances (Q7(1)(e) and (f)) |
| 419 | 59 59 | Election of remedies / prohibition of double recovery under TUTSA (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 134A.004) | Kassab | defense | Fair market value ($250,000) and avoided development costs ($200,000) are duplicative measures of the same loss; a buyer acquiring secrets at fair market value necessarily avoids development costs; Pohl must elect one |
| 420 | 59 59 | TUTSA preemption of conspiracy (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 134A.007) | Kassab | defense | TUTSA displaces conflicting tort law providing civil remedies for misappropriation; conspiracy is a conflicting remedy per VEST Safety and weight of Fifth Circuit district court authority |
| 421 | 59 59 | Chapter 33 proportionate responsibility applies to conspiracy (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 33.002) | Kassab | defense | Civil conspiracy is an intentional tort (Firestone Steel) subject to Chapter 33; conspiracy is not listed among exemptions; courts conclude proportionate responsibility rather than joint and several liability applies (Seven Seas, Pemex) |
| 422 | 59 59 | Indirect misappropriation requires direct misappropriation by upstream party — Precision's exoneration breaks chain | Kassab | defense | Jury found Precision did not misappropriate (Q2(a)(3), Q2(b)(3)) and assigned 0% fault (Q4). TUTSA § 134A.002(3)(B)(ii)(a) requires knowing acquisition from someone who used improper means. Since Precision was exonerated, daisy-chain of indirect misappropriation is broken. |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
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
);