citation_id,filing_id,case_name,citation,court,year,proposition,cited_by
355,35,"Waisath v. Lack's Stores, Inc.","474 S.W.2d 444, 447",Tex.,1971,"Conversion is the unauthorized and wrongful assumption and exercise of dominion and control over personal property of another, to the exclusion of or inconsistent with the owner's rights",Pohl
356,35,"Akin v. Santa Clara Land Co., Ltd.","34 S.W.3d 334, 344",Tex. App.—San Antonio,2000,"Elements of conversion: ownership/possession, unauthorized dominion, refusal of demand for return",Pohl
357,35,Hunt v. Baldwin,"68 S.W.3d 117, 131",Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.],2001,Elements of conversion claim,Pohl
358,35,"Fred Siegel Co., L.P.A. v. Arter & Hadden","85 Ohio St. 3d 171, 182, 707 N.E.2d 853, 862",Ohio,1999,Law firm's client list could constitute a trade secret,Pohl
359,35,Reeves v. Hanlon,"95 P.3d 513, 522",Cal.,2004,Client data can constitute trade secrets,Pohl
360,35,"King Ranch, Inc. v. Chapman","118 S.W.3d 742, 750",Tex.,2003,No-evidence motion requires court to disregard all contrary evidence and inferences,Pohl
361,35,Guillory v. Dietrich,"598 S.W.3d 284, 294",Tex. App.—Dallas,2020,Demand and refusal are not required if defendant wrongfully acquired possession,Pohl
362,35,French v. Moore,"169 S.W.3d 1, 13",Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.],2004,"Demand for return required only if defendant legally obtained possession; conversion requires right to possession, not necessarily ownership",Pohl
363,35,El Paso Prod. Co. v. Valence Operating Co.,"112 S.W.3d 616, 625",Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.],2003,Demand for return not required if possessor's acts manifest clear repudiation of plaintiff's rights,Pohl
364,35,"Wiese v. Pro Am Services, Inc.","317 S.W.3d 857, 862",Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.],2010,Owner is competent to testify regarding value of converted property and such testimony will sustain a verdict in absence of controverting evidence,Pohl
365,35,Burns v. Rochon,"190 S.W.3d 263, 270-71",Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.],2006,Owner testimony supports verdict on value of converted property,Pohl
366,35,Burlington N. R.R. v. Gen. Projection Sys.,"No. 05-97-00425-CV, 2000 WL 1100874",Tex. App.—Dallas,2000,Testimony by plaintiff's CFO concerning converted property's rental value was legally and factually sufficient to support loss of use damages,Pohl
367,35,Pemex Exploracion y Produccion v. BASF Corp.,2013 WL 5514944,S.D. Tex.,2013,Each possession of converted property is a new conversion,Pohl
368,35,"Trilogy Software, Inc. v. Callidus Software, Inc.","143 S.W.3d 452, 463",Tex. App.—Austin,2004,"Trade secret may consist of any formula, pattern, device or compilation of information used in business giving advantage over competitors, including a list of customers",Pohl
369,35,"Regency Field Services, LLC v. Swift Energy Operating, LLC",622 S.W.3d 807,Tex.,2021,Defendant seeking summary judgment on limitations must conclusively establish that limitations period expired before suit was filed,Pohl
370,35,Sw. Energy Prod. Co. v. Berry-Helfand,491 S.W.3d 699,Tex.,2016,TUTSA cause of action accrues when trade secret is actually used commercially,Pohl
371,35,"Agar Corp., Inc. v. Electro Circuits Int'l, LLC",580 S.W.3d 136,Tex.,2019,Civil conspiracy claim accrues as to each underlying tort when that tort occurs,Pohl
372,35,Cheatham v. Pohl,"No. 01-20-00046-CV, 2022 WL 3720139",Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.],2022,"Only four plaintiffs' barratry claims remain live; court took no position on validity of barratry claim, concluding only that a fact issue continues to exist",Pohl
373,35,Dugger v. Arredondo,408 S.W.3d 825,Tex.,2013,The common law unlawful acts doctrine is no longer a viable defense under proportionate responsibility framework,Pohl
374,35,Taylor v. Tolbert,644 S.W.3d 637,Tex.,2022,Attorney immunity applies only to lawyerly work in adversarial contexts; conduct foreign to duties of lawyer is not protected,Pohl
375,35,"Haynes & Boone, LLP v. NFTD, LLC",631 S.W.3d 65,Tex.,2021,Attorney immunity inapplicable to conduct outside scope of client representation,Pohl