Valid Business Expectancies for Tortious Interference

Tortious interference with business expectancy consists of the (1) existence of a valid business expectancy; (2) knowledge of the expectancy by the party being sued; (3) intentional interference which induced breach of the expectancy; (4) absence of justification; and (5) damages.
The existence of a valid business expectancy is usually one of the more tricky elements in litigation, particularly if the claim is being levied against a competitor. Under Missouri law, as a court once explained, a competitor can be liable under the following guidelines:
Competition as Proper or Improper Interference (1) One who intentionally causes a third person not to enter into a prospective contractual relation with another who is his competitor or not to continue an existing contract terminable at will does not interfere improperly with the other’s relation if
(a) the relation concerns a matter involved in the competition between the actor and the other and
(b) the actor does not employ wrongful means and
(c) his action does not create or continue an unlawful restraint of trade and
(d) his purpose is at least in part to advance his interest in competing with the other.
(2) The fact that one is a competitor of another for the business of a third person does not prevent his causing a breach of an existing contract with the other from being an improper interference if the contract is not terminable at will.
Contact us regarding contract dispute or business litigation 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