Barrow v. Arizona Board of Regents

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that employees acting on 19 behalf of a university in its contract relations cannot interfere with the university’s contract 20 because they are acting on behalf of the university and a party cannot interfere with its own 21 contracts
• explaining that summary judgment in favor of defendants is proper where the “plaintiff [ ] failed to produce any evidence that the defendants were acting other than within the scope of their authority as management representatives”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).