Tortious Interference with a Valid Business Expectancy

To make a submissible case for tortious interference, one must plead (and ultimately prove) a (1) valid existing contract or business expectancy; that (2) the defendant had knowledge of the existing contract or business expectancy; (3) a business impairment and/or breach of contract is induced or caused by the defendant’s intentional interference; (4) there is no justification for the breach; and (5) there are ascertainable damages from the breach.
One of the more problematic and difficult elements to prove is the lack of justification. Under Missouri law, the burden is on the Plaintiff (i.e., the person requesting money damages) to prove that the Defendant had no legitimate business reason for the action(s). Indeed, it is almost always the case that a Defendant will say that he/she was acting in the normal course of business and that the actions were bona fide business decisions. In such a circumstance, it is up to the Plaintiff to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that this is pretextal and/or untrue. Proof of the Defendant’s business conduct in the past is helpful.
Contact us with any questions.

Related Articles

Future Lost Profits

February 18, 2023

The purpose of damages (i.e., a money award from a judge/jury) is to make a plaintiff whole. With a contract case, for instance, the goal is to “restore a plaintiff to the position he would have been in had the contract not been breached.” Lipton Rlty v. St. Louis Housing Authority, 705 S.W.2d 565, 569 (Mo….

Read More

Anticipatory Breach by Repudation

November 9, 2022

A breach of contract occurs when a party fails to adhere to the requirements of a contract. Missouri recognizes the concept of anticipatory breach of contract by repudiation. An anticipatory breach is the equivalent of an actual breach of contract. TDV Transp., Inc. v. Keel, 966 S.W.2d 347, 349 (Mo. App. E.D. 1998).  Generally, to establish…

Read More

Merger Doctrine, Contracts

March 8, 2022

A “merger clause” is a common provision in a contract. It will usually state something along the lines of the contract being a “complete and exclusive statement of the agreement.” If a contract is a final, complete agreement, the parol evidence rule prohibits prior or contemporaneous oral agreements which vary or contradict the written terms…

Read More

Aggrieved Party, Right to Appeal

January 19, 2022

Any “aggrieved” party to a final judgment may appeal. Section 512.020, RSMo. To be “aggrieved,” certain requirements must be present. The judgment must “operate prejudicially and directly on the party’s personal or property rights or interests, and such effect must be immediate, not merely a possible remote consequence.” Bi-State Development Agency of Missouri-Illinois Metropolitan Dist….

Read More
Scroll to Top