record thus does not wholly negate Jacob’s testimony that Killian took photographs on that date. Moreover, Jacob’s expert determined that not all of the photographs in the record were taken on January 7, 2000. Killian also admitted that he inspected Jacob’s property on June 26, 2001. In addition, Jacob testified more generally that there were many occasions on which he walked out of his house and found Killian “rummaging around” or “rumbling and rambling” in the yard. Jacob even recalled the details of a specific conversation that he had with Killian on one such occasion. Jacob legitimately claims that he could not list the specific date of each incident because Killian intruded on his property so many times. Cf. Harvill v. Westward Commc’ns, L.L.C., 433 F.3d 428, 436 (5th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). The dates of Killian’s alleged intrusions are
holding that the plaintiffs sexualharassment claim that she was touched numerous times instead of providing exact dates or the exact number of instances did not prevent her allegations from raising a genuine issue of material fact holding that there was a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment holding that there is no independent tort duty because the exact same conduct is described in both the contract and tort claims and the exact same facts and circumstances are at play which is indicative of    overlapping duties holding that plaintiff failed to show genuine issue of material fact on equitable estoppel claim holding that unsupported allegations or denials are insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact for purposes of summary judgment