issue_id,name,cluster,relevance,summary,kassab_position,pohl_position,result,appellate_status,authorities
2,Summary Judgment on Barratry Liability,Substantive,High,Kassab filed 3 MSJs (all denied); Pohl’s barratry partial MSJ went to trial.,No barratry occurred; client solicitation was proper marketing; no prohibited direct contact.,Undisputed evidence showed prohibited solicitation of clients within 31 days of incidents; per se violation of Penal Code § 38.12.,All Kassab MSJs denied. Pohl’s barratry MSJ proceeded to trial. Jury found barratry.,On appeal (1st COA No. 01-24-00220-CV). Opening brief filed Jan 2025.,Tex. Penal Code § 38.12; Tex. Gov’t Code § 82.065; Tex. R. Civ. P. 166a.
3,Counterclaim Viability,Substantive,Moderate,Kassab’s counterclaims dismissed with prejudice on Pohl’s MSJ (Feb 2022).,"Pohl engaged in tortious interference, defamation, and abuse of process.",Counterclaims lacked factual basis and were contradicted by record evidence.,"Counterclaims dismissed with prejudice (Feb 7, 2022).",Not independently appealed. May be raised as cross-issue on appeal.,Tex. R. Civ. P. 166a(c); Tex. R. Civ. P. 91a.
5,Trade Secret Misappropriation (TUTSA),Substantive,Moderate,Jury found TUTSA violation. Part of compensatory damages.,Information obtained was not protectable trade secrets; no improper means used.,Confidential client lists and case information constituted trade secrets; Kassab obtained them through improper means.,Jury found TUTSA violation. Compensatory damages included trade secret component.,Under appeal. Fee-recovery and damages allocation challenged.,Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 134A.001 et seq.
9,Conversion of Settlement Proceeds,Substantive,Low,Part of original claims. Jury found for Pohl. Subsumed in compensatory damages.,No conversion; fees were properly earned under retainer agreements.,Kassab converted settlement funds that belonged to Pohl’s former clients.,Jury found conversion. Included in compensatory damages.,Under appeal as part of sufficiency challenge.,"Tex. Penal Code § 31.03 (by analogy); Waisath v. Lack’s Stores, 474 S.W.2d 444 (Tex. 1971)."
10,Civil Conspiracy,Substantive,Low,Original claim. Jury found conspiracy between Kassab and co-defendants.,No agreement to engage in unlawful conduct; co-defendants acted independently.,Kassab coordinated with Favre and others to solicit Pohl’s clients through barratrous means.,Jury found civil conspiracy. Joint and several liability with settled co-defendants.,Under appeal. Kassab challenges sufficiency of conspiracy evidence.,"Firestone Steel Prods. Co. v. Barajas, 927 S.W.2d 608 (Tex. 1996)."