Key Assertions
Data license: Public court records
19 rows where filing_id = 61
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
| assertion_id ▼ | filing_id | assertion |
|---|---|---|
| 1049 | 61 61 | Pohl's Reply was filed well after working hours the night before the hearing on entry of judgment |
| 1050 | 61 61 | When the Court asked Pohl if any court in any jurisdiction had been flexible enough to award attorney's fees in other litigation as actual damages for a trade secret claim, the silence was telling |
| 1051 | 61 61 | Bruce v. Oscar Renda Contracting is distinguishable because there was no Additional Certificate requiring specific unanimity certification |
| 1052 | 61 61 | Stover is distinguishable because the predicate questions for exemplary damages (Q15 and Q16 on fraud and malice) were certified as unanimous in the Additional Certificate, unlike Q17 here |
| 1053 | 61 61 | Bryan is distinguishable because the trial judge noticed the ambiguity and sent jury back — nothing required the party opposing exemplary damages to object |
| 1054 | 61 61 | Redwine is the case most analogous to the present case — jury's failure to certify predicate question as unanimous bars exemplary damages |
| 1055 | 61 61 | Under Redwine, this situation does not amount to a conflicting jury finding where a party must object before discharge to preserve error |
| 1056 | 61 61 | Under United Scaffolding v. Levine, a defendant has no obligation to complain about a plaintiff's omission; the burden to secure proper findings is on the plaintiff |
| 1057 | 61 61 | Section 41.003(b) provides the burden of proving exemplary damages may not be shifted to the defendant |
| 1058 | 61 61 | Kassab was not required to ask the trial court to fix an error that would result in a judgment in its favor |
| 1059 | 61 61 | Pohl's out-of-state cases (Dunsmore, World Wide Prosthetic) authorize recovery of lost profits, fees, or commissions — not attorney's fees from other litigation |
| 1060 | 61 61 | Pohl is not a 'malpractice plaintiff' and Akin Gump's 'malpractice plaintiff' exception does not apply |
| 1061 | 61 61 | One without clean hands cannot obtain an equitable remedy per Frazier v. Havens |
| 1062 | 61 61 | The issue on clean hands is not causation (Q4 assigned 0% to Pohl) but that one found to have engaged in 'wrongful conduct' (Q3) does not have clean hands |
| 1063 | 61 61 | The First Court of Appeals in Reynolds v. Sanchez Oil & Gas Corp. found TUTSA preempts aiding and abetting claim based on misappropriation of trade secrets under the plain language of TUTSA |
| 1064 | 61 61 | The conspiracy question (Q15) asked about conduct found in Q2 (misappropriation) — conspiracy claim is based entirely on alleged misappropriation |
| 1065 | 61 61 | Pohl acknowledges there is nothing inconsistent about the jury's findings regarding Precision |
| 1066 | 61 61 | If there was no misappropriation when information passed from Pohl to Precision, no one downstream could have misappropriated |
| 1067 | 61 61 | Kassab was not required to forfeit a winning hand by objecting to jury findings |
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
);