Atlanta Market Center Management Co. v. McLane

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that “those who benefit from the contract of others,” including unintended third-party beneficiaries, are not strangers to the contract
• holding that the trial court correctly granted summary judgment to a party as to a claim of tortious interference with a contract when the defendant was not a stranger to the employment contract at issue
• providing that one is not a stranger to a contract if they “would benefit from the contract with which [they are] alleged to have interfered”
• affirming grant of summary judgment on tortious interference claim against person involved in “business relationship giving rise to and underpinning the contract”
• endorsing cases reducing the number of entities against which tortious interference may be maintained and holding “all parties to an interwoven contractual arrangement are not liable for tortious interference with any of the contracts or business relationships”
• common “stranger doctrine” applies to distinct torts of interference with business relations and interference with contractual relations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).