Cited by

Although it is not improper for a competitor to advance their own economic interest, ¶ 32 (App. 2005) (citing Bar J Restatement (Second) of Torts (“Restatement”) § 768 (1979)), Appellees miss the mark.

erference with business expectancy, the plaintiff must prove: “(1) the existence of a valid contractual relationship; (2) knowledge of the relationship on the part of the interferor; (3) intentional interference inducing or causing a breach; (4) resultant damage to the party whose relationship has been disrupted; and (5) improper action on the part of the defendant.” Bar J

g; see also Bar J Bar Cattle Co., (“One who interferes with the contractual rights of another for a legitimate competitive reason does not become a tort-feasor simply because he may also bear ill will toward his competitor.”).

See Bar J Bar Cattle Co., (“The duty not to interfere with the contract of another arises out of law, not contract.”).

In fact, the tort may be committed even where the plaintiff has no contractual rights but simply the prospect of a contractual relationship.” Bar J

See Bar J (“The duty not to interfere with the contract of another arises out of law, not contract.”).

See Bar J (listing “improper action on the part of the defendant” as required element of the tort of intentional interference with a contract).

See Bar J Bar Cattle Co., , (“[I]t is a tort to improperly cause the cancellation, rather than a breach of a terminable contract.”).

§ 12-341.01 because the “duty not to interfere with the contract of another arises out of law, not contract.” Bar J accord Cashway Concrete & (although contract breach is “factual predicate” to materialman’s lien foreclosure action, such a claim “exists against those who are foreign to the contract” and does not “ari

“The duty not to interfere with the contract of another arises out of law, not contract.” Bar J

even when there is no contractual relationship between the parties at all.”); Fairway Constructors, -58 (App. 1998) (unfair competition arises out of tort); Bar J (“The duty not to interfere with the contract of another arises out of law, not contract.”); W. Techs., Inc. v. Sverdrup & Parcel, Inc., 7-8, 1324-25 (App. 1986) (interference with prospective business advantage not found to arise out of contr

The standard for liability, however, “must be applied with discrimination, particularly where the conduct in question takes place in the context of competitive business activities.” Bar J

not on whether a breach [or termination of the expectancy] followed.” Bar J see also Miller, 104 P.3d at 202 (“The interference must be ‘improper’ before liability will attach.”), quoting id.

See, e.g., Hadley v. Southwest Props., Inc., , Bar J , (citing Restatement § 766B, cmt.

” Bar J , (emphasis added).

d Stores, Inc. v. Mather and Assocs., Inc., -92 , -28 (1995) (a suit for negligent construction resulting in property damage arose from tort, not contract); , (claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress did not arise out of insurance contract); Bar J , (“The duty not to interfere with the contract of another arises out of law, not contract.”); Western Techs., Inc. v. Sverdrup & Parcel, Inc., , (“the law imposed on Sverdrup a duty not to speak negligently, injuriously or falsely o