Legal Question in Business Law in California

RE: (Tortious) Interference With Business/Contractual Relationship cause of action ("INTERFERENCE") ..... I read the elements for INTERFERENCE, and Plaintiff can sue the Defendant for INTERFERENCE, as long as all the elements are met, but my question is,,,, What about the 3rd party (the company that had contract with Plaintiff, which was later breached) that was influenced (Bribed), to commit the breach, at the instigation of the defendant?... Does Plaintiff have legal/legitimate grounds to sue the 3rd party for accepting bribe from defendant? Does Plaintiff sue that 3rd party (Plaintiff's former business partner) for 1.) Interference of Business Relationship AND Conspiracy to commit Interference? ,,,because the Interference allegations would be against the defendant, and the conspiracy allegation would be against the 3rd party, all in the same cause of action (because conspiracy is not a stand alone cause of action). Or can that 3rd party be sued for Fraud and/or Breach of Contract in a separate cause of action (in same complaint, or separate complaint).


Asked on 2/10/15, 5:49 pm

1 Answer from Attorneys
Christopher M. Brainard, Esq. C. M. Brainard & Associates - (310) 266-4115

Question reject... already answered. If you are going to push this question and this case (which appears to be frivolous), give some more facts and explain how the bribe was illegal! Like, did the person making the payment ("bribe") owe you a duty to not buy out your contract with the other party? Because its perfectly legal to purchase someone's breach of contract absent some other duty or obligation. Example: you engage a contractor to fix your house and I come along later and pay the contractor more to do my house and breach with you -- perfectly legal... Or I can just pay them to not service you and breach with you and not even require them to fix my house... perfectly legal... is this an illegal bribe/actionable interference in your mind? A conspiracy theory against the breaching party for interference seems impossible even if there was a fiduciary duty owed by the bribing party anyway... unless there was some criminal aspect to it... this line of thought seems faulty and as I stated in the response you have deleted... I think this case (unless you can show some clear illegality to the bribe/inducement) is a good candidate for SLAPP and/or malicious prosecution by you due to a lack of probable cause to file... If I'm wrong and you have real foundation for an interference claim... go ahead and provide real facts there supporting it and I'll give you some good advice... I always try to... but here you seem upset about things that likely are not actionable..

Read more
Answered on 2/13/15, 11:16 am


Related Questions & Answers

More Business Law questions and answers in California