Duty Free Americas, Inc. v. The Estee Lauder Companies, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that interference is privileged “unless the [claimant] alleges a purely malicious motive divorced from any legitimate competitive economic interest” or “adequately alleges improper methods” (cleaned up)
• noting that interference is privileged “unless the [claimant] alleges a purely malicious motive divorced from any legitimate competitive economic interest” or “adequately alleges improper methods” (cleaned up)
• affirming dismissal of tortious interference claim for failing to support it with facts
• stating what a plaintiff must show to state a contributory false advertising claim
• The Court must “accept the allegations in the complaint as true and construe them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.”
• the constitutional standing doctrine “implicates [a court’s] subject matter jurisdiction, and accordingly must be addressed as a threshold matter.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).