filing_sections: 174

553 document sections with headings and summaries

Data license: Public court records

This data as json

section_id	filing_id	heading	summary
174	23	A. Res judicata does not apply	Argues res judicata does not apply because facts changed when Pohl sued Kassab, enabling Section 16.069 revival. Cites Marino v. State Farm (res judicata does not apply to subsequently acquired rights or changed material facts) and Lubbock v. Stubbs (estoppel by judgment extends only to facts as they existed at time of judgment). Section 16.069 was not an available defense in the prior litigation. Also notes logical inconsistency: if Pohl says barratry claims are from different transactions than his claims, then res judicata (which requires same transaction) cannot apply. Cites Barr v. Resolution Trust Corp.