KMS Restaurant Corp. v. Wendy's International, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the chairman of a corporation and shareholder lacked standing to maintain an action in his own name to redress injuries to a corporation
• holding that only a corporation, not a shareholder, has standing to maintain a suit for tortious interference against the corporation
• holding that the chairman of a company could not personally assert a claim for tortious interference where the operative contract assigned him no legal rights of his own, rather his company was the proper plaintiff
• stating that, in the qualified privilege to interfere context, “even where the defendant's motive is not purely malicious, a tortious interference claim may succeed if improper methods were used.”
• “[A] party cannot argue an issue in its reply brief that was not preserved in its initial brief.” (quotation omitted)
• individual lacked standing to bring tortious interference claim because he had no rights under the agreement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).