The general Demurrer (# 11) of Defendant Adam Elhag ("Defendant") to causes of action 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 in the Complaint of Plaintiff National Funding Inc. ("Plaintiff"), is OVERRULED. INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH A PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE
Regarding the first cause of action, intentional interference with a prospective economic advantage has five elements: (1) the existence, between Plaintiff and some third party, of an economic relationship that contains the probability of future economic benefit to Plaintiff; (2) Defendant's knowledge of the relationship; (3) intentionally wrongful acts designed to disrupt the relationship; (4) actual disruption of the relationship; and (5) economic harm proximately caused by Defendant's action. Roy Allan Slurry Seal, Inc. v. American Asphalt South, Inc. (2017) 2 Cal. 5th 505, 512. Further, the Court has emphasized the requirement of an existing relationship and have held that "the tort 'protects the expectation that the relationship event
Hearing Date
May 16, 2019
Category
Civil - Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
The general Demurrer (# 11) of Defendant Adam Elhag ("Defendant") to causes of action 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 in the Complaint of Plaintiff National Funding Inc. ("Plaintiff"), is OVERRULED. INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH A PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE
Regarding the first cause of action, intentional interference with a prospective economic advantage has five elements: (1) the existence, between Plaintiff and some third party, of an economic relationship that contains the probability of future economic benefit to Plaintiff; (2) Defendant's knowledge of the relationship; (3) intentionally wrongful acts designed to disrupt the relationship; (4) actual disruption of the relationship; and (5) economic harm proximately caused by Defendant's action. Roy Allan Slurry Seal, Inc. v. American Asphalt South, Inc. (2017) 2 Cal. 5th 505, 512. Further, the Court has emphasized the requirement of an existing relationship and have held that "the tort 'protects the expectation that the relationship event