theory_id,filing_id,theory,party,role,basis
154,17,Limitations Rebuttal — Separate Accrual for Each Defendant,Pohl,defense,"Claims against Kassab accrued from his specific conduct (November 2016 purchase and subsequent use), not from prior conduct of others. Each possession is a new conversion. TUTSA accrues upon commercial use. Kassab must conclusively establish accrual and negate the discovery rule, which he has not done."
155,17,"Res Judicata Rebuttal — No Privity, Different Subject Matter",Pohl,defense,"Kassab was not a party to the Federal Court Case. Under Texas three-part privity test, mere allegations of conspiracy are insufficient. Kassab provides no evidence of control, representation of interests, or successor-in-interest status. The factual bases differ: Federal Counterclaim addressed conversion of funds (billing fraud), not theft of confidential information."
156,17,Attorney Immunity Rebuttal — No Attorney-Client Relationship; Conduct Outside Scope,Pohl,defense,Kassab had no clients when he purchased stolen information. His conduct of buying stolen property is not uniquely lawyerly. The doctrine requires both scope of representation and attorney-client relationship at the time of conduct. Solicitation preceding the 'meeting of the minds' cannot be within scope of client representation. Kassab provided no evidence of an attorney-client relationship at the time of wrongful conduct.