Legal Question in Business Law in California

Re: Tortious Interference with Contract

basically, the elements of intentional tortious interference with contract would be: 1) intent to interfere with 2) an existing contract (quite possibly even prospective advantage in some instances) and 3) that actually and proximately damaged you economically in some way that a court can fashion a remedy to make you "whole" again. typically only compensatory damages are awarded, unless there is fraud or malice present in which punitive damages may be awarded. however, any and all damages you may sue for may not be too remote or speculative in nature.

if you want further assistance, feel free to email me more specific details of your case.

Re: Tortious Interference with Contract

If I recall, the elements are (1) a valid contract (2) interference with its performance by a person not a party thereto (3) which is wrongful, and (4) economic harm to a party to the contract which (5) flows causally from the interference.

The requirement that the interference be 'wrongful' excludes fair competitive practices. I do not recall whether there is an additional requirement that the interference be knowing, malicious, with 'scienter' or such, but the presence of such a factor would certainly tighten a case above mere negligent interference.

Money damages would be awarded on the basis of proof of economic harm sustained, which is a matter of proof at trial. Punitive damages would be available at the discretion of judge or jury if the plaintiff showed fraud, malice or oppression.

Proving compensable harm from less tangible activities is tougher than, say, proving harm from an auto accident or even a slip-and-fall (although the extent of harm is always a tough issue, its existence is easier when there is physical injury to life, limb or property.

Nevertheless, I think tortious interference is a well-established cause of action and cases are frequently won where the plaintiff prepares well.