Defenses Raised

397 defensive theories across all filings

Data license: Public court records

12 rows where filing_id = 34

This data as json, CSV (advanced)

defense_id ▼ filing_id defense
238 34 34 Justification — Kassab had legal right to investigate and pursue barratry claims; motive irrelevant when legal right established
239 34 34 Unclean hands — Pohl seeks equitable relief (injunction, TUTSA equitable title, equitable prayer) despite own illegal conduct
240 34 34 Illegality — Pohl's claims barred because trade secrets obtained through illegal barratry; same defense Pohl's lawyers used in Duncan Litig. Invs.
241 34 34 Unlawful Acts Rule — Pohl's illegal acts at time of injury bar recovery (Andrew Shebay v. Bishop)
242 34 34 Criminal Acts — Pohl's barratry is a criminal offense barring recovery
243 34 34 In Pari Delicto — Courts can deny recovery to Pohl for his own illegal acts even if defendants also acted wrongfully
244 34 34 Assumption of the Risk — Pohl trusted convicted felon Walker with trade secrets without NDA or confidentiality agreements
245 34 34 Lack of Standing / Defect of Parties — Pohl does not own the alleged trade secrets; Precision Marketing owns them per Walker and Ladner testimony
246 34 34 Attorney Immunity — established in prior MSJs including Rule 17.09 immunity and judicial proceedings privilege
247 34 34 Limitations — established in June 2021 and August 2022 MSJs
248 34 34 Res Judicata — established in June 2021 MSJ
249 34 34 Procedural defense — Pohl's no-evidence motion is conclusory and insufficient under Timpte Industries v. Gish

Advanced export

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

CSV options: 

CREATE TABLE defenses_raised (
    defense_id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT,
    filing_id INTEGER REFERENCES filings(filing_id),
    defense TEXT
);