How To Prove A Florida Tortious Interference With a Contract or Business Relationship Claim
In Florida, a claim of Tortious Interference With a Contract or Business Relationship is defined as:
Tortious Interference occurs when a third party intentionally and improperly interferes with a business relationship or with the performance of the terms of a contract.
It simply means:
When a third party tries to disrupt or damage a contract or business relationship.
There are 4 elements of the claim:
- Element 1. There was a business relationship, not necessarily evidenced by an enforceable contract, under which the plaintiff had legal rights. A business relationship existed between the parties, which may not have been formally documented, but still granted the plaintiff certain legal rights that were affected by the interference.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The plaintiff had a longstanding business relationship with a third party, characterized by regular transactions and mutual reliance.
* The plaintiff provided services to the third party, which were integral to the third party’s operations and profitability.
* The third party expressed a clear intention to continue its business dealings with the plaintiff, indicating a mutual understanding of their relationship.
* The plaintiff had previously received verbal assurances from the third party regarding ongoing collaboration, demonstrating an expectation of continued business.
* The plaintiff’s business reputation was built on the relationship with the third party, which was known to be beneficial to both parties. - Element 2. The defendant knew of the relationship. In a claim for tortious interference, it must be shown that the person causing the interference was aware that a contract or business relationship existed between two other parties.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant attended multiple social events where the plaintiff and the third party were present, indicating awareness of their relationship.
* The defendant received direct communication from the plaintiff about the ongoing contract with the third party, demonstrating knowledge of the relationship.
* The defendant was informed by mutual acquaintances about the plaintiff’s business dealings with the third party, suggesting familiarity with their relationship.
* The defendant had previously discussed the plaintiff’s contract with the third party in conversations, indicating an understanding of their business relationship.
* The defendant observed the plaintiff and the third party collaborating on projects, which would reasonably lead to knowledge of their relationship. - Element 3. The defendant intentionally and without justification interfered with the relationship. The defendant purposely disrupted someone else’s business or personal relationship without a good reason, causing harm or damage to that relationship.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The defendant knowingly contacted the plaintiff’s business partner to persuade them to terminate their contract with the plaintiff.
* The defendant made false statements about the plaintiff’s business practices to potential clients, causing them to withdraw from negotiations.
* The defendant intentionally spread rumors about the plaintiff’s financial stability to disrupt existing business relationships.
* The defendant attended a meeting with the plaintiff’s clients and attempted to convince them to switch their loyalty to a competitor.
* The defendant had prior knowledge of the plaintiff’s contractual obligations and still chose to interfere with those relationships. - Element 4. The plaintiff suffered damages as a result of the interference. The plaintiff experienced harm, such as financial loss or missed opportunities, because someone wrongfully disrupted their contract or business relationship, making it difficult for them to succeed or fulfill their agreements.
Facts that might support this element look like:
* The plaintiff lost a significant client due to the defendant’s actions, resulting in a 30% decrease in revenue for the quarter.
* The plaintiff incurred additional legal fees while attempting to resolve the contract dispute caused by the defendant’s interference.
* The plaintiff’s reputation was damaged, leading to a loss of future business opportunities and potential contracts.
* The plaintiff experienced emotional distress and anxiety, impacting their ability to perform effectively in their business operations.
* The plaintiff was forced to lay off employees due to the financial strain caused by the defendant’s interference with their business relationships.
(See Salit v. Ruden, McClosky, Smith, Schuster, 742 So. 2d 381 (Fla. Court of Appeals 1999).)
If you’re in court without a lawyer and plan to assert a Claim of Tortious Interference With a Contract or Business Relationship, having a Personal Practice of Law at Courtroom5 is essential. You’ll need to make critical decisions about what to file at each phase of your case and prepare legal documents supported by thorough legal research and a strong analysis of the facts. Equip yourself with the tools and knowledge to effectively navigate your legal journey.
Prove Your FL Tortious Interference With a Contract or Business Relationship Claim
U.S. Civil Cases Only