Legal Theories
Data license: Public court records
10 rows where filing_id = 46
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
| theory_id ▼ | filing_id | theory | party | role | basis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 328 | 46 46 | Barratry irrelevance to tort claims | Pohl | claim | Establishing barratry does not constitute a denial or defense to conversion, TUTSA, or conspiracy claims; does not impact trade secret ownership |
| 329 | 46 46 | Trade secret ownership unaffected by barratry | Pohl | claim | Even if barratry occurred, attorney retains ownership of client list compilations and contract copies; voidability affects enforceability against client, not ownership; TUTSA defines 'owner' as person with rightful, legal, or equitable title per § 134A.002(3-a) |
| 330 | 46 46 | No standing to assert barratry | Pohl | claim | Only State Bar (disciplinary), State of Texas (criminal), and affected clients (civil) have standing to enforce barratry rules; Kassab has none |
| 331 | 46 46 | Unlawful Acts Doctrine preemption | Pohl | claim | Preempted by proportionate responsibility statute per Dugger v. Arredondo, 408 S.W.3d 825 (Tex. 2013); 'plain language of section 33.003 clearly indicates that the common law unlawful acts doctrine is no longer a viable defense' |
| 332 | 46 46 | Illegality / In Pari Delicto inapplicable | Pohl | claim | These defenses apply to enforcement of illegal contracts; Pohl asserts no contract claims against Kassab; even if relevant, Pohl's contracts are voidable not void, and none have been voided |
| 333 | 46 46 | Justification defense inapplicable | Pohl | claim | Justification is a defense to tortious interference with contract only (Tex. Beef Cattle, Knox v. Taylor), not conversion, TUTSA, or conspiracy; if acts are 'tortious in themselves,' justification never arises (Prudential) |
| 334 | 46 46 | Rule 17.09 Immunity inapplicable | Pohl | claim | Pohl's claims predate Kassab's grievance participation and are not 'predicated upon' the grievance filing; Kassab is not a State Bar official with official-duties immunity |
| 335 | 46 46 | Unclean hands inapplicable | Pohl | claim | Applies only to equitable relief (Pohl no longer seeks any); requires nexus and injury to person raising defense (Wood v. Wiggins); alleged barratry did not injure Kassab |
| 336 | 46 46 | Contract-related defenses inapplicable | Pohl | claim | Release, accord and satisfaction, estoppel apply to contract claims — Pohl asserts none; 'subject to valid contract' (express contract defense) applies only to quantum meruit (Pepi Corp.); Kassab admitted these don't apply |
| 337 | 46 46 | Assumption of risk / contribution eliminated | Pohl | claim | Texas Supreme Court held these common law defenses no longer exist; concepts survive only in proportionate responsibility statute (Austin v. Kroger, 465 S.W.3d at 209-10) |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE legal_theories (
theory_id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT,
filing_id INTEGER REFERENCES filings(filing_id),
theory TEXT,
party TEXT,
role TEXT,
basis TEXT
);