Key Assertions
Data license: Public court records
26 rows where filing_id = 59
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
| assertion_id ▼ | filing_id | assertion |
|---|---|---|
| 997 | 59 59 | The jury's answer to Question 17 was not unanimous — the presiding juror did not sign the unanimity certificate for Question 17 |
| 998 | 59 59 | The general verdict certificate shows the jury checked 'ten jurors agreed' rather than 'unanimous' |
| 999 | 59 59 | Pohl's assertion that the jury unanimously found willful and malicious misappropriation is 'erroneous and false' |
| 1000 | 59 59 | The presiding juror signed unanimity certificates for Questions 2 and 19 but conspicuously did not sign for Question 17 |
| 1001 | 59 59 | The jury did not answer Question 18 |
| 1002 | 59 59 | Attorneys' fees incurred in defending barratry suits and grievances are not 'actual losses' under TUTSA |
| 1003 | 59 59 | 'Actual loss' under TUTSA means loss of profits, lost customers, or lost market share based on uniform interpretation across states |
| 1004 | 59 59 | No Texas court has ever allowed attorneys' fees in other cases to be recovered as actual damages in a trade secret claim |
| 1005 | 59 59 | At least one Texas court (Lacore Enters.) has concluded that attorney's fees incurred in a lawsuit are not actual damages under TUTSA |
| 1006 | 59 59 | Fees expended in prior litigation generally are not recoverable as damages under Texas law |
| 1007 | 59 59 | The tort of another doctrine has never been embraced by the Texas Supreme Court and was flatly rejected by the Fourteenth Court of Appeals |
| 1008 | 59 59 | The tort of another doctrine requires the plaintiff to be 'wholly innocent' and the jury found in Q3 that Pohl's wrongful conduct contributed to the injury |
| 1009 | 59 59 | Rule 17.09 provides absolute and unqualified immunity for persons filing grievances |
| 1010 | 59 59 | $112,286 in attorneys' fees for defending grievances (Q7(1)(e) and (f)) are not recoverable as a matter of law |
| 1011 | 59 59 | The $250,000 market value and $200,000 development cost damages are impermissibly overlapping — development costs are 'taken into account' in market value |
| 1012 | 59 59 | Conspiracy is preempted by TUTSA's displacement provision (§ 134A.007) |
| 1013 | 59 59 | No Texas case has addressed TUTSA preemption of conspiracy, but federal courts in the Fifth Circuit support preemption |
| 1014 | 59 59 | Civil conspiracy is an intentional tort subject to Chapter 33's proportionate responsibility scheme |
| 1015 | 59 59 | Chapter 33 lists claims to which it does not apply and does not list conspiracy |
| 1016 | 59 59 | The jury found Precision did not misappropriate trade secrets (Q2(a)(3) and Q2(b)(3)) |
| 1017 | 59 59 | The jury assigned 0% fault to Precision in Question 4 |
| 1018 | 59 59 | Pohl originally sued Precision but non-suited his claims against Precision; Precision was designated as a responsible third party |
| 1019 | 59 59 | Precision was defined in the jury charge to include Walker, Seymour, and Ladner (before May 12, 2015) and Favre (after May 12, 2015) |
| 1020 | 59 59 | Kassab acquired Pohl's alleged trade secrets from Precision, so Precision's exoneration breaks the chain of indirect misappropriation |
| 1021 | 59 59 | Indirect misappropriation is 'daisy-chain' liability requiring the first person in the chain to have committed direct misappropriation |
| 1022 | 59 59 | TUTSA § 134A.002(3)(B)(ii)(a) requires the person misusing the trade secret to know it was derived from someone who used improper means |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE key_assertions (
assertion_id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT,
filing_id INTEGER REFERENCES filings(filing_id),
assertion TEXT
);