Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. John Carlo Texas, 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 charge did not ask a jury the ultimate issue in a tortious interference contract suit and therefore the jury findings did not support the judgment
• holding that the charge did not ask a jury the ultimate issue in a tortious interference contract suit and therefore the jury findings did not support the judgment
• recognizing that there must be an intent to interfere or a belief “that interference was substantially certain to result from its actions”
• holding that a party’s actions do not interfere with a contract when they are a mere exercise of the party’s own rights
• holding that “[t]o ask the [fact finder] to resolve this [factual] dispute without a proper legal definition to the essential legal issue was reversible error” and remanding for new trial
• holding that ―[i]nterference with a contract is tortious only if it is intentional‖

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).