Ohrenstein v. Zoning Board of Appeals

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that proof of either malice or the use of unlawful means is necessary to sustain an action for interference with an at-will business relationship
• finding that “the record discloses no evidence of malice or the use of unlawful means by [counterclaim defendant], proof of one or the other being necessary to sustain an action for interference with at-will business relationships”
• proof of malice or unlawful means is essential in an action for interference with at-will business relationships
• \[D]amages must be pleaded and proved as an essential element of a cause of action for tortious interference with business relations.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).