Kwang Dong Pharmaceutical Co. v. Myun Ki Han

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “vague references” to promising prospective relationships are not sufficient to support an interference claim
• noting that “vague references” to promising prospective relationships are not sufficient to support an interference claim
• stating that under Maryland law, tortious interference with a prospective advantage is the same tort as tortious interference with business relationships
• dismissing an intentional interference claim under D.C. law because the plaintiff “has not pointed to any specific contractual relations that [the defendant] allegedly interfered with”
• regarding choice of law on the plaintiffs claim for fraud, declining to decide whether D.C. or Maryland law applied, but noting that the law was the same
• dismissing fraudulent misrepresentation claim because the counterclaims did not contain “anything more than [an] assertion that [counter-defendant] had no intention of honoring the contracts at the time they were entered.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).