Key Takeaways

  • Tortious interference includes intentional and negligent actions disrupting contracts or economic relationships.
  • California recognizes three types: interference with contractual relations, interference with prospective advantage, and negligent interference.
  • To establish intentional interference, a plaintiff must show a valid contract, knowledge, intent, disruption, and damages.
  • Independently wrongful acts like fraud or defamation may support interference claims even without a formal contract.
  • Defenses include lack of knowledge, justification, absence of a valid contract, or legitimate competition.
  • Remedies may include compensatory damages, punitive damages, and injunctive relief.

A tortious interference with contract California claim allows the recovery of damages for intentional or negligent acts resulting in economic damage. Tortious interference is also known in California as "economic interference."

Information About Tort Claims

When filing a claim for an intentional tort, proof must be presented that the defendant had every intention of causing alleged harm to the plaintiff or that the defendant knew harm was the likely outcome of their actions.

If the claim is for negligence, the plaintiff must show that the defendant owed the plaintiff a certain duty of care. It must also be proved that instead of the defendant providing the duty, they breached the duty and subsequently caused the plaintiff harm.

Tortious interference with economic relations includes three actions:

  • Intentional interference with contractual relations
  • Intentional interference with a prospective economic advantage
  • Negligent interference with a prospective economic advantage

Intentional Interference With Contractual Relations

California case law governs and enforces each of these claims.

A claim involving intentional interference with contractual relations is most common when a defendant's conduct is cited as having caused the third party to breach their contract. To succeed in such a lawsuit, the plaintiff must prove five things:

  1. A legitimate contract existed between the plaintiff and third party.
  2. The defendant knew about the contract.
  3. The intentional acts of the defendant were designed to cause a breach of the contractual relationship.
  4. An actual breach or disruption of the contractual relationship occurred.
  5. The breach or disruption resulted in damage.

This tort claim must have an enforceable contract. If there is no contract or a contract exists but is unenforceable, the only recourse the plaintiff has is to file a claim for interference with prospective economic advantage.

Common Legal Defenses to Intentional Interference Claims

When defending against a claim of intentional interference with contractual relations in California, several legal defenses may be available:

  • Lack of Knowledge: The defendant can argue they were unaware of the contract, and therefore could not have intentionally interfered.
  • No Intent to Interfere: If the defendant's actions were not specifically intended to disrupt the contract, this undermines the intent element.
  • Justification or Privilege: The defendant may argue that their conduct was justified, such as protecting a legitimate economic interest or engaging in fair competition.
  • No Actual Breach: If the contract was not actually breached or disrupted, a key element of the tort claim is missing.
  • Contract Not Valid or Enforceable: The plaintiff must prove the existence of a valid, enforceable contract. If the contract is void or terminable at will, the claim may fail.
  • Statute of Limitations: The plaintiff must file within California’s applicable statute of limitations—generally two years from when the interference occurred.

These defenses often depend on the specific facts of the case and can be critical in court proceedings involving CACI intentional interference with contractual relations.

Intentional Interference With Prospective Economic Advantage

A lawsuit for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage, for the most part, involves interference with a potential contract by the defendant. It may include interference with any economic relationship that may provide benefits to the plaintiff in the future. This could include interference with any lawfully operated business, occupation, or trade.

This claim also requires that the defendant prove five things:

  1. An economic relationship between the plaintiff and a third party existed and had a probability of supplying economic benefits to the plaintiff in the future.
  2. The defendant's knowledge of the relationship.
  3. Intentionally disrupted actions.
  4. Actual disruption of the relationship.
  5. Economic harm to the plaintiff due to the defendant's actions.

Proof of a written contract is not required in an intentional interference with prospective economic advantage claim.

Negligent Interference With Prospective Economic Advantage

The plaintiff must prove four things:

  1. The plaintiff and a third party had an economic relationship with the possibility of future economic benefits for the plaintiff.
  2. The defendant was aware of the relationship and was aware that their actions would interfere with the relationship.
  3. The defendant was negligent. The plaintiff must show that the conduct the defendant engaged in was wrongful in a way other than that of the interference itself.
  4. Negligence caused damage to the plaintiff and to the relationship.

Instead of proving that the defendant had actual knowledge of the economic relationship, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant knew or should have known and that their acts would be disruptive.

Elements of Interference Claims

A defendant's conduct must be separate from the interference. The defendant's intent is the difference between intentional interference and negligent interference.

A plaintiff must prove that the defendant's interference with an economic relationship was wrongful beyond the interference itself. If an act is unlawful, it is considered independently wrongful.

Fraud, libel, and misappropriation of trade secrets are common examples of independently wrongful acts. These examples support a cause of action for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage.

The Role of CACI Jury Instructions

The California Civil Jury Instructions (CACI) provide standardized guidance to juries evaluating claims of intentional interference with contractual relations. Specifically, CACI No. 2201 outlines the required elements a plaintiff must prove. This includes:

  1. A valid and existing contract between the plaintiff and a third party.
  2. The defendant’s knowledge of this contract.
  3. Intentional acts by the defendant aimed at disrupting the contractual relationship.
  4. Actual disruption or breach of the contract.
  5. Resulting harm or damages to the plaintiff.

CACI instructions are important because they guide both legal professionals and jurors on what constitutes tortious interference under California law. Including these clear criteria helps ensure fair and consistent rulings in business litigation cases.

Damages and Recovery

Several types of damages are possible:

  • Punitive recovery for damages stems from intentional interference. It may be available if the defendant acted with malice, oppression, or fraud.
  • Damages for tortious interference with economic relations may include recovery for all resulting harm. This would include mental distress, expenses, and damage to a business's reputation.
  • Injunctive relief is available as a restraint to any threat of future interference with economic relations.

Examples of Tortious Interference Cases in California

Tortious interference claims often arise in business settings where competition or conflicts of interest can lead to disputes. Examples include:

  • Client Poaching: A competing business knowingly convinces a client to break an exclusive service agreement.
  • Supplier Interference: A third party persuades a supplier to terminate a distribution agreement with a business partner.
  • Employee Raiding: A former employer encourages current employees under contract with a competitor to leave, causing business disruption.

These examples highlight the practical application of the principles behind CACI intentional interference with contractual relations and demonstrate how courts assess damages, motives, and business impact.

Preventative Measures and Best Practices

Businesses can take several steps to reduce the risk of facing or committing tortious interference:

  • Use Written Contracts: Clear, legally enforceable agreements reduce ambiguity and strengthen your position if litigation arises.
  • Educate Staff: Ensure employees understand legal boundaries regarding client or vendor interactions, especially during competitive activities.
  • Include Non-Solicitation and Confidentiality Clauses: These contractual provisions help protect relationships and proprietary information.
  • Document All Business Communications: Maintaining records can provide evidence of good faith actions and intent.
  • Seek Legal Review of Business Strategies: When entering competitive markets or recruiting from competitors, legal guidance can prevent missteps.

Implementing these practices minimizes exposure to claims of CACI intentional interference with contractual relations while protecting valuable business relationships.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is considered intentional interference with a contract in California? Intentional interference involves knowingly disrupting a valid contract between others, resulting in breach or harm.

2. Is a written contract required for a tortious interference claim? Yes, for intentional interference with contractual relations, a valid written or verbal contract must exist. For prospective economic advantage, a formal contract is not required.

3. How long do I have to file a tortious interference claim in California? Generally, the statute of limitations is two years from the date of interference.

4. Can a business be sued for hiring someone under contract with another company? Potentially, yes—if the hiring party knew of the contract and induced the employee to breach it, this could support a claim.

5. What damages can be recovered in a CACI intentional interference case? Recoverable damages may include lost profits, reputational harm, mental distress, and possibly punitive damages if malicious intent is proven.

If you need help with tortious interference with contracts in California, you can post your legal need on UpCounsel's marketplace. UpCounsel accepts only the top 5 percent of lawyers to its site. Lawyers on UpCounsel come from law schools such as Harvard Law and Yale Law and average 14 years of legal experience, including work with or on behalf of companies like Google, Menlo Ventures, and Airbnb.