Wrongful Interference With Employment Relationship California In Bexar
Description
Form popularity
FAQ
Tortious interference is a common law tort allowing a claim for damages against a defendant who wrongfully interferes with the plaintiff's contractual or business relationships. See also intentional interference with contractual relations.
The requisite elements of tortious interference with contract claim are: (1) the existence of a valid and enforceable contract between plaintiff and another; (2) defendant's awareness of the contractual relationship; (3) defendant's intentional and unjustified inducement of a breach of the contract; (4) a subsequent ...
Every case is obviously different but, in general, most parties to a breach of contract action agree that (1) a contract exists, (2) the contract is enforceable and not void, and (3) that they performed under the contract.
Interference with Employment typically occurs when an employee is seeking future employment and the former employer gives a negative reference or acts in some other way purposefully designed to interfere with the employee's reasonable expectation of employment.
Proving tortious interference in court is complicated. It is a complex legal issue that requires a great deal of evidence. Your best recourse is to have a business attorney who specializes in tort and contract law.
To recover damages for inducing breach of contract in California, the plaintiff must prove that: The plaintiff was in a valid contractual relationship with a third party; The defendant knew of the existing contract; The defendant intended to induce the third party to breach the contract with the plaintiff;
Interference With Existing Contractual Relationships A contract exists between the business and another individual or business. The contract was valid. An outside (third) party had knowledge of this contract. The outside party purposefully and wrongfully disrupted the contractual relationship.
As an example, someone could use blackmail to induce a contractor into breaking a contract; they could threaten a supplier to prevent them from supplying goods or services to another party; or they could obstruct someone's ability to honor a contract with a client by deliberately refusing to deliver necessary goods.
