Key Assertions
Data license: Public court records
30 rows where filing_id = 65
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
| assertion_id ▼ | filing_id | assertion |
|---|---|---|
| 1117 | 65 65 | Attorney-client contracts are part of the client's file owned by the client, not the lawyer — Pohl as agent cannot claim trade secret protection in principal's property |
| 1118 | 65 65 | Pohl offered no evidence at trial that attorney-client contracts derive independent economic value from not being generally known |
| 1119 | 65 65 | Pohl cannot have a competitive advantage by using client-related information to the exclusion of the clients themselves |
| 1120 | 65 65 | Pohl's only interest was keeping identities of unlawfully solicited individuals secret to avoid accountability |
| 1121 | 65 65 | Attorney-client contracts and client identities are not privileged or confidential as a matter of law |
| 1122 | 65 65 | The Master List of Pohl's alleged clients has been available on PACER for the last six years |
| 1123 | 65 65 | Client list was created by Precision, not by Pohl, and was voluntarily produced to Favre, Nicholson, and third parties in August 2016 discovery in the Mississippi litigation without protective order or confidentiality stamp |
| 1124 | 65 65 | Jury found Precision did NOT misappropriate trade secrets (Q2(a)(3), Q2(b)(3)) and assigned 0% fault to Precision (Q4(3)) |
| 1125 | 65 65 | Precision defined in jury charge to include Walker, Seymour, and Ladner prior to May 12, 2015, and Favre after May 12, 2015 |
| 1126 | 65 65 | Favre purchased Precision and its principals certified in purchase documents they owned the information; Favre certified to Kassab information belonged to Precision, not Pohl |
| 1127 | 65 65 | Alleged theft by Precision owners (Walker, Ladner, Seymour) occurred in June 2014; Pohl knew files were misappropriated on that date |
| 1128 | 65 65 | Precision sold to Favre in May 2015 — Pohl required to file claims before May 2018 at latest |
| 1129 | 65 65 | Pohl consulted attorney about claims against Kassab in June 2017 but did not file until August 2018 |
| 1130 | 65 65 | Jury found Pohl's wrongful conduct (barratry) contributed to his injury (Q3 Yes) |
| 1131 | 65 65 | Kassab used information to report Pohl's barratry to State Bar, courts, and affected clients |
| 1132 | 65 65 | Pohl testified Kassab used trade secret information to initiate grievances; jury awarded attorney fees for defending grievances as proximate cause damages (Q7(1)(e), (f)) |
| 1133 | 65 65 | Kassab entered joint venture agreement on November 11, 2016 with other lawyers to investigate and pursue barratry claims against Pohl |
| 1134 | 65 65 | Kassab obtained first client by at least February 2017 and filed four barratry lawsuits on behalf of more than 400 of Pohl's former and potential clients |
| 1135 | 65 65 | Kassab sent notification letters to victims of Pohl's barratry through middle of 2017 while in attorney-client relationships with hundreds of clients |
| 1136 | 65 65 | Court of appeals previously noted Kassab's conduct 'arose out of a commercial transaction involving the type of legal services Kassab provides' (Kassab v. Pohl, 612 S.W.3d at 578) |
| 1137 | 65 65 | Jury answered Q6 'No' (attorney immunity) but Kassab argues no evidence supports that finding |
| 1138 | 65 65 | TUTSA does not define 'actual loss' (§ 134A.004); sister-state cases define it as lost profits, lost customers, lost market share — not attorney fees from other litigation |
| 1139 | 65 65 | No Texas court has ever allowed attorney fees in other cases to be recovered as actual damages in a trade secret claim |
| 1140 | 65 65 | Jury awarded $250,000 for fair market value (Q7(2)) but Pohl presented only intrinsic value testimony, not market value |
| 1141 | 65 65 | Jury awarded $200,000 for development costs avoided (Q7(3)) but no testimony from any witness about Kassab's development costs |
| 1142 | 65 65 | Kassab and Montague paid Favre a retainer to act as expert in barratry litigation — jury may have derived $250,000 from this |
| 1143 | 65 65 | Predicate Q17 finding was not unanimous — presiding juror signed unanimity certificates for Q2 and Q19 but conspicuously did not sign for Q17 |
| 1144 | 65 65 | General verdict certificate shows 'ten of us agreed' — not unanimous |
| 1145 | 65 65 | Pohl allegedly paid Precision $5 million in 'barratry money' to unlawfully solicit clients |
| 1146 | 65 65 | Tort of another exception never adopted by Texas Supreme Court, rejected by 14th COA, and requires wholly innocent plaintiff |
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
);