Bushnell Corp. v. ITT Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting claim as insufficient to enable a defense where alleged communications were made to “customers and the industry in general”
• applying Kansas law and granting judgment on the pleadings against tortious interference with contract claim because plaintiff hadn’t “identified any third-party contract that was breached as a result of improper interference by defendant”
• denying dismissal and permitting amendment only so plaintiff may allege clarifying facts
• “If, on the other hand, plaintiff does not state a claim with respect to certain allegations because the procedural pleading requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a
• “[P]laintiff has alleged that it had ‘contractual relations’ with its customers and vendors. It has not, however, alleged that any particular contract was breached as a result of conduct by defendant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).