Quantcast

Tag Archives: Tortious Interference With Contract

Tort/Negligence – Tortious Interference with Contract – Justification – Real Property – Sales Commissions (access required)

Broach v. Carter Although the plaintiff-real estate agents showed that defendant Jacobson knew he was causing the defendant-real estate agency to breach its contract with plaintiffs by subordinating their commissions to the development’s construction loan, Jacobson was justified in doing so. Without a renegotiated construction loan, neither plaintiffs nor anyone else involved in the project would have gotten paid.

Read More »

Tort/Negligence – Tortious Interference with Contract – Real Property – Real Estate Agents’ Commission (access required)

Broach v. Carter Defendant was justified in interfering with the plaintiff-real estate agents’ contracts with their agency. The agency had breached its first contract with the developer by failing to sell enough condo units in the Horizon 77th project. If defendant had not agreed to subordinate the agents’ commissions to the construction loan, the project would not have gone forward.

Read More »

Tort/Negligence – Tortious Interference with Contract – Corporate Agent – Qualified Privilege – Scope of Authority (access required)

Dutch Fork Development Group II, LLC v. SEL Properties, LLC Plaintiffs failed to show that defendant Lipscomb acted outside his authority as a member of the defendant-LLC when he performed the acts that breached the parties’ contract. We reverse the trial court’s denial of Lipscomb’s motions for a directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict on plaintiffs’ claim of tortious interference with contract.

Read More »

Tort/Negligence – Tortious Interference With Contract – Labor & Employment – Staffing Companies – Competitors (access required)

Focused Systems, Inc. v. Aerotek, Inc. The defendant-staffing agency did not tortiously interfere with the contracts that IT professionals had with the plaintiff-staffing agency when defendant merely agreed to employ the IT professionals who asked to work for defendant. Defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted.

Read More »