assertion_id,filing_id,assertion
412,24,Kassab admitted the Assignments were made to 'potentially revive the barratry claims dismissed on limitations in Brumfield and Gandy'
413,24,"After purported 'assignment,' clients retained 60% interest in claims and Kassab retained 40% contingent fee interest, demonstrating the Assignments were shams that altered nothing about claim ownership"
414,24,The Assignments have 'no practical effect' by Kassab's own description and were 'effectuated in an attempt to salvage the clients' barratry claims'
415,24,Kassab was simultaneously representing clients in two appellate proceedings (Brumfield and Gandy) asserting the exact same claims without notifying those courts of the purported assignments
416,24,Pohl's briefing in the Texas Supreme Court referred to 'purported' assignments and notified the Court that Kassab had argued they were valid — this is not an inconsistent position
417,24,"Pohl did not prevail on the alternative argument about the Assignments in the Texas Supreme Court, making judicial estoppel inapplicable"
418,24,Kassab's estoppel argument selectively omitted the requirement that a party must have 'successfully maintained' a position for judicial estoppel to apply
419,24,PPG's reasoning about non-assignability was explicitly not limited to DTPA claims — it applies to a class of statutory punitive claims
420,24,The legislature knew how to make barratry claims assignable but the statute is silent on assignment
421,24,"Kassab's citation of M.A. Mills v. Kotts was misleading — the court explicitly stated courts 'may deem these rules to be an expression of public policy, so that a contract violating them is unenforceable'"
422,24,"January 28, 2022 Notices in Brumfield (No. 21-0563) and Gandy (No. 21-0564) show the Texas Supreme Court denied petitions for review and dismissed Pohl's Motions to Dismiss as moot"
423,24,Kassab devoted just over a single page of his 27-page Response to the dispositive res judicata argument
424,24,Kassab selectively omitted the word 'significant' from the logical relationship test standard
425,24,"The risks of distortion discussed in PPG apply to barratry claims as a class, not just specific facts"
426,24,Whether Pohl subsequently failed to obtain a hearing on special exceptions is irrelevant to whether fair notice was provided within the statutory period