Key Assertions
Data license: Public court records
23 rows where filing_id = 62
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
| assertion_id ▼ | filing_id | assertion |
|---|---|---|
| 1068 | 62 62 | Under Menchaca, the party who must rely on the conflicting answer to avoid the effect of answers establishing liability bore the burden to object — that is Kassab |
| 1069 | 62 62 | Bruce v. Oscar Renda directly holds that the defendant — the party opposing exemplary damages — had the burden to object to lack of unanimity certificate before jury was discharged |
| 1070 | 62 62 | In Bruce, there was a certificate of unanimity but it could not be used because questions were misnumbered — yet exemplary damages were still awarded |
| 1071 | 62 62 | Stover demonstrates that not all predicate answers to a finding of exemplary damages require a certificate of unanimity — this is fatal to Kassab's argument |
| 1072 | 62 62 | In Stover, jury did not sign unanimity certificate for questions 5 and 6 (threshold liability) but court upheld exemplary damages because later predicate questions were certified unanimous |
| 1073 | 62 62 | In Bryan, the defendant's counsel requested the jury be polled — Kassab should have done the same |
| 1074 | 62 62 | Redwine predates the Texas Supreme Court's 2018 opinion in Menchaca |
| 1075 | 62 62 | Redwine is facially not on point because the court polled the jury and confirmed non-unanimity; Kassab chose not to poll the jury |
| 1076 | 62 62 | Under TUTSA plain text, Pohl is entitled to recover 'actual loss caused by misappropriation' including damages measured by attorneys' fees in other cases |
| 1077 | 62 62 | Kassab does not argue Pohl fails to satisfy the elements listed in Dixon for tort of another |
| 1078 | 62 62 | There is no clean hands requirement for the tort of another theory per published precedent including Dixon, Massey, Lesikar, Standard Fire, and Symetra |
| 1079 | 62 62 | The Texas Supreme Court's discussion of tort of another in Akin Gump indicates no clean hands requirement |
| 1080 | 62 62 | The jury did not find Pohl had unclean hands — Q3 found unspecified 'wrongful conduct' contributing to unspecified 'injury' |
| 1081 | 62 62 | To establish unclean hands defense, Kassab must show an injury to himself arising from the conduct per Wood v. Wiggins |
| 1082 | 62 62 | Nothing connects any wrongful conduct by Pohl to any injury to Kassab |
| 1083 | 62 62 | Kassab argues proportionate responsibility applies to TUTSA but then argues conspiracy is preempted — fails to explain the inconsistency |
| 1084 | 62 62 | Kassab falsely claims Pohl asserts no Texas caselaw supports TUTSA preemption of conspiracy — Pohl actually said Kassab has no caselaw finding there can no longer be a conspiracy to misappropriate trade secrets |
| 1085 | 62 62 | The jury never found Kassab received Pohl's trade secrets from Precision — evidence showed Favre sold them to Kassab |
| 1086 | 62 62 | The jury found Favre misappropriated Pohl's trade secrets, which is fatal to Kassab's chain-of-liability argument |
| 1087 | 62 62 | Kassab's representation that 'those associated with Precision did not misappropriate anything' is false given jury found Favre misappropriated |
| 1088 | 62 62 | The jury's 'No' on Precision could have many explanations — Pohl had no reason to present evidence of Precision's misconduct |
| 1089 | 62 62 | Kassab, not Pohl, designated Precision as a responsible third party and requested Precision be listed in the jury charge |
| 1090 | 62 62 | If relevant, Kassab should have presented evidence and requested an affirmative jury finding that Precision did not breach any duty to Pohl |
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
);