Legal Theories
Data license: Public court records
9 rows where party = "Kassab/Nicholson" and role = "affirmative_defense"
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: filing_id
| theory_id ▼ | filing_id | theory | party | role | basis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 275 | 35 35 | Statute of Limitations Defense (rebutted) | Kassab/Nicholson | affirmative_defense | Defendants argue claims are time-barred; Pohl shows conversion claim accrued no earlier than November 2016 (within 2-year period per § 16.003(a)), TUTSA claim accrued no earlier than November 10, 2016 (within 3-year period per § 16.010(a)), and each possession of converted property is a new conversion (Pemex) |
| 276 | 35 35 | Attorney Immunity Defense (rebutted) | Kassab/Nicholson | affirmative_defense | Defendants claim attorney immunity; Pohl responds that immunity applies only to lawyerly work in adversarial contexts (Taylor v. Tolbert) and conduct foreign to duties of lawyer is not protected (Haynes & Boone v. NFTD) |
| 280 | 36 36 | Statute of Limitations (rebutted) | Kassab/Nicholson | affirmative_defense | Claims accrued no earlier than November 2016 purchase; each possession is new conversion (Pemex); TUTSA accrues upon actual use (Berry-Helfand); discovery rule doesn't cause accrual before defendant commits tort |
| 281 | 36 36 | Unlawful Acts Doctrine / Illegality / In Pari Delicto (rebutted) | Kassab/Nicholson | affirmative_defense | Preempted by proportionate responsibility statute (Dugger v. Arredondo, § 33.003); requires 'admittedly unlawful act' (Denson) and proximate cause (Pyeatt); Pohl can prove claims without proving own illegal act (Marathon Oil); State Bar dismissed all grievances |
| 282 | 36 36 | Attorney Immunity (rebutted) | Kassab/Nicholson | affirmative_defense | Applies only to 'lawyerly work' in adversarial contexts with existing attorney-client relationship (Taylor v. Tolbert; Youngkin v. Hines); purchasing stolen property before having clients is not within scope of representation (Landry's); solicitation precedes relationship formation (Tanox) |
| 283 | 36 36 | Judicial Proceedings Privilege (rebutted) | Kassab/Nicholson | affirmative_defense | Applies only to communications in due course of judicial proceedings and only to libel/slander (Landry's); Pohl's claims are for theft, not communications |
| 286 | 36 36 | Failure to Protect Trade Secrets (rebutted) | Kassab/Nicholson | affirmative_defense | TUTSA requires only 'reasonable measures under the circumstances'; Pohl took extensive steps (informed Precision of confidentiality, secure office, 24-hour security, coded elevators, etc.); Mississippi court issued protective orders; absence of written confidentiality provision does not negate protection |
| 287 | 36 36 | Lack of Ownership (rebutted) | Kassab/Nicholson | affirmative_defense | Even if client files belong to clients, Pohl had right to possession until client demand (none shown); contracts are voidable not void under § 82.0651(a); Walker and Ladner testified materials belonged to Pohl |
| 288 | 36 36 | Damages Not Recoverable (rebutted) | Kassab/Nicholson | affirmative_defense | TUTSA § 134A.004(a) authorizes 'actual loss caused by misappropriation'; defense fees qualify; Martin-Simon questioned by Texas Supreme Court; Dixon v. Chang confirms prior litigation fees recoverable as actual damages |
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
);