Tom's Foods, Inc. v. Carn

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 defendant was not a stranger to the business relationship between the other two parties because the defendant “was involved in creating that relationship”
• holding that the defendant was not a stranger to the business relationship between the other two parties because the defendant “was involved in creating that relationship”
• finding that the defendant was not “a stranger to the business relationship . . . [because w]ithout the relationship between [the defendant and the customer, the plaintiff] would have had no relationship with [the customer]”
• finding that “Tom’s Foods had a legitimate economic interest in the security agreements and promissory notes at issue,” even after they were assigned to a third party because Tom’s Foods remained liable on the notes
• applying doctrine of competitor’s privilege as defined by § 768 of the Restatement to intentional interference claim
• discussing the justification element of a tortious interference with business relations claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).