Clark v. Figge

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a claim for interference in business relationships was “fundamentally proprietary in character although incidental injuries may have been of a different nature”
• “injuries to person” include bodily hurts or death; “typical illustration of injury to the reputation is publication of slanderous or libelous material”
• five-year limitation period applies to the tort of intentional interference with prospective economic advantage
• five-year limitation period applies to the tort of intentional interference with prospective economic advantage
• tor-tious interference with a business relationship

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).