Legal Opinion

Mid-South Beverages, Inc. v. Forrest City Grocery Co., Inc.

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided October 23, 1989No. 89-23PublishedCited by 33 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Darrell Hickman, Justice.

The question is whether the complaint filed by the appellant stated a cause of action for the tort of interference with a contractual relationship or business expectancy. The chancellor ruled it did not and dismissed the complaint with prejudice. We reverse his decision and remand for further proceedings.

The elements of the tort of interference are: (1) the existence of a valid contractual relationship or a business expectancy; (2) knowledge of the relationship or expectancy on the part of the interferor; (3) intentional interference inducing or causing a breach or…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Walt Bennett Ford, Inc. v. Pulaski County Special School DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1981
  2. Battle v. HarrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. American Abstract & Title Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2005
  2. Cross v. Arkansas Livestock & Poultry CommissionSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1997
  3. Hames v. CravensSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
  4. Godwin v. ChurchmanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
  5. King v. WhitfieldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999

28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API