How To Prove A Florida Tortious Interference with an Expectancy Claim

 

 

In Florida, a claim of Tortious Interference with an Expectancy is defined as:

Tortious Interference with an Expectancy occurs when a third party intentionally interferes with another person’s expectancy or reasonable expectation of receiving an economic benefit or advantage.

It simply means:

When someone interferes with another person’s expected economic benefit or advantage.

There are 4 elements of the claim:

• Element 1. There was an expectation of receiving an economic benefit or advantage. existence of an expectancy. In a claim of tortious interference with an expectancy, it means that someone was hoping to gain a financial benefit or opportunity, like a job or inheritance, that they reasonably believed they would receive.
  

  Facts that might support this element look like:

  * The plaintiff had a longstanding business relationship with a key client, which generated consistent revenue over several years.
  * The plaintiff had received verbal assurances from the client regarding future contracts, indicating a clear expectation of continued business.
  * The plaintiff had invested significant resources in developing a proposal tailored to the client’s needs, anticipating a favorable response.
  * The plaintiff was in negotiations with the client for an upcoming project, which both parties had expressed interest in finalizing.
  * The plaintiff had documented communications that outlined the client’s intent to proceed with a new agreement, reinforcing the expectation of economic benefit.

• Element 2. The defendant intentionally interfered with the expectancy through tortious conduct. The defendant deliberately took actions that disrupted someone else’s reasonable hope of receiving a benefit, like a job or inheritance, through wrongful behavior, which is a key part of proving a claim for tortious interference with an expectancy.
  

  Facts that might support this element look like:

  * The defendant knowingly made false statements about the plaintiff’s business practices to potential clients, damaging the plaintiff’s reputation.
  * The defendant actively solicited the plaintiff’s clients by offering them incentives to break their contracts with the plaintiff.
  * The defendant had prior knowledge of the plaintiff’s contractual relationships and took steps to disrupt them.
  * The defendant engaged in deceptive practices to lure away the plaintiff’s employees, undermining the plaintiff’s operations.
  * The defendant’s actions were motivated by a desire to harm the plaintiff’s business interests and gain a competitive advantage.

• Element 3. The plaintiff suffered damages. The plaintiff experienced harm or loss, such as financial setbacks or emotional distress, because someone wrongfully interfered with their expected benefits, like a job offer or business deal, disrupting what they anticipated receiving.
  

  Facts that might support this element look like:

  * The plaintiff lost a lucrative business contract due to the defendant’s intentional interference with negotiations.
  * The plaintiff incurred significant legal fees while attempting to resolve the dispute caused by the defendant’s actions.
  * The plaintiff experienced a decline in revenue as a direct result of the defendant’s interference with their business relationships.
  * The plaintiff’s reputation was damaged, leading to a loss of potential clients and future business opportunities.
  * The plaintiff suffered emotional distress and anxiety due to the uncertainty and financial strain caused by the defendant’s actions.

• Element 4. The defendant’s conduct was the cause of the plaintiff’s damages. The defendant’s actions directly led to the plaintiff losing something they were expecting to receive, like a job offer or a business deal, showing that the defendant’s behavior was responsible for the plaintiff’s harm or loss.
  

  Facts that might support this element look like:

  * The defendant knowingly made false statements about the plaintiff’s business practices to potential clients, leading to a loss of contracts.
  * The defendant intentionally contacted the plaintiff’s key partners, persuading them to withdraw their support and terminate their agreements with the plaintiff.
  * The defendant’s actions directly resulted in the plaintiff losing a significant investment opportunity, causing financial harm.
  * The defendant’s interference disrupted the plaintiff’s established relationships, leading to a decline in revenue and reputation.
  * The plaintiff can demonstrate a clear timeline linking the defendant’s conduct to the subsequent damages incurred.

^{(See Whalen v. Prosser, 719 So. 2d 2 – Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 2nd Dist. 1998. Davison v. Feuerherd, 391 So.2d 799 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980).)}
If you’re in court without a lawyer and plan to assert a Claim of Tortious Interference with an Expectancy, it’s essential to have a Personal Practice of Law at Courtroom5. 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. Our resources can help you navigate this complex process effectively.

Prove Your FL Tortious Interference with an Expectancy Claim

U.S. Civil Cases Only