White Plains Coat & Apron Co. v. Cintas Corp.

867 N.E.2d 381 (2007)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P alleges that it had five-year exclusive service contracts with customers and that, knowing of these arrangements, D nonetheless induced dozens of P's customers to breach their contracts and enter into rental agreements with D. White Plains by letter demanded that D desist solicitation and discontinue servicing its contract customers, enclosing a list of customers allegedly solicited improperly. D denied knowledge of any contracts and continued its solicitation. P sued D. After discovery, D sought summary judgment, arguing that it had no knowledge of contracts with P and had not induced any breach. The District Court dismissed the complaint, in that D had the defense of economic justification. To overcome D's defense, P had to show that D acted with malice or illegality. P appealed. The court certified a question to the State Supreme Court. The Second Circuit sought clarification as to the broader reach of the defense and therefore certified the following potentially dispositive question to us: 'Does a generalized economic interest in soliciting business for profit constitute a defense to a claim of tortious interference with an existing contract for an alleged tortfeasor with no previous economic relationship with the breaching party?'