Stolz v. Wong Communications Limited Partnership

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a \[negligent interference claim] arises only when the defendant owes the plaintiff a duty of care” and stating that plaintiff's complaint \did not allege such a duty, nor could it, since it was plain that plaintiff and defendant were competitors”
• noting that there is “no authori- ty” that extends the tort to administrative proceedings
• holding no duty of care could exist because plaintiff and defendants were competitors
• misuse of the Federal Communications Commission broadcast licensing process failed to state a cause of action for abuse of process because no actionable abuse of judicial process was alleged
• misuse of the Federal Communications Commission broadcast licensing process failed to state a cause of action for abuse of process because no actionable abuse of judicial process was alleged
• “We have located no authority extending the tort of abuse of process to administrative proceedings. Application of the tort to administrative proceedings would not serve the purpose of the tort, which is to preserve the integrity of the court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).