FORT LAUDERDALE BUSINESS LITIGATION: TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE

Tortious interference is a well-known business tort. One may tortiously interfere with a contract or a business relationship. The elements of tortious interference with a contract or business relationship essentially the same. A plaintiff asserting a tortious interference claim must prove the existence of a relationship which may or may not be evidenced by an enforceable contract, the existence of legal rights to the relationship; the defendant’s knowledge concerning the relationship, the defendant’s intentional and unjustified interference with the relationship, and damage incurred by the plaintiff resulting from the interference. Salit v. Ruden, McClosky, Smith, Schuster & Russell, P.A., 742 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). The Fort Lauderdale business litigation attorneys of the Mavrick Law Firm represent businesses and their owners in breach of contract litigation and related claims of fraud, non-compete agreement litigation, trade secret litigation, trademark infringement litigation, employment litigation, and other legal disputes in federal and state courts and in arbitration.

A plaintiff may try to assert a tortious interference claim based on the defendant’s interference with a contractual relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant. However, this type of tortious interference claim cannot stand because a defendant cannot tortiously interfere with a contract that he or she is already a party to. Menudo Int’l, LLC v. In Miami Prod., LLC, 2018 WL 1745395 (S.D. Fla. Apr. 11, 2018) (The “the interfering defendant must be a third party, a stranger to the business relationship.”). This rule has been applied broadly to include defendants that do not possess a direct contractual relationship with the plaintiff if the defendant possesses some beneficial relationship with the plaintiff. Nimbus Techs., Inc. v. SunnData Prod., Inc., 484 F.3d 1305 (11th Cir. 2007) (“A defendant is not a stranger to a business or contractual relationship if the defendant ‘has any beneficial or economic interest in, or control over, that relationship.”). Courts hold that a tortious interference claim cannot survive if an interested third party is accused of interfering with its own interests because the alleged conduct is merely freedom of contract, not interference. Palm Beach Cty. Health Care Dist., 13 So. 3d at 1090 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009).

The legal principles discussed above were examined in Nimbus Techs., Inc. v. SunnData Prods., Inc., 484 F.3d 1305 (11th Cir. 2007). In Nimbus Techs., Inc., the plaintiff sued the defendant for tortious interference because the defendant allegedly ruined the relationship between the plaintiff and a third party. However, the defendant presented evidence demonstrating it loaned money to the third-party. The loan was consequential because it provided the defendants with an interest in the relationship between the plaintiff and the third-party. Specifically, the defendant had a financial interest in the successful nature of the relationship because it would allow the defendant to recover its loan proceeds. Therefore, the court determined the defendant could not be liable to the plaintiff for tortious interference because he was part of the relationship between the plaintiff and the third-party.  Nimbus Techs., Inc. v. SunnData Prods., Inc., 484 F.3d 1305 (“Nimbus cannot establish an essential element of its intentional interference claim, no genuine issue of fact exists for trial, and summary judgment in favor of the defendants was appropriate.”).

For plaintiffs, it is important to carefully allege the facts comprising one’s tortious interference claim to ensure those allegations do not demonstrate that the defendant has some interest in the relationship between the plaintiff and the third-party. For defendants, it is important to remember that a preexisting bona-fide relationship with the third-party may provide a path to defeating a tortious interference claim.

The Fort Lauderdale business litigation attorneys of the Mavrick Law Firm represent businesses and their owners in breach of contract litigation and related claims of fraud, non-compete agreement litigation, trade secret litigation, trademark infringement litigation, employment litigation, and other legal disputes in federal and state courts and in arbitration.