Legal Opinion
Harman v. Heartland Food Company
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided July 18, 2000No. C5-99-1805PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DAVIES, Judge.
After a jury trial, appellants Heartland Food Company and Tim Johnson were found liable on respondent Mark Harman’s claims for defamation and wrongful interference with a contractual relationship. They challenge the trial court’s denial of their motion for JNOV. Appellants argue that (1) Johnson’s statement about Har-man’s skills was non-actionable and (2) any interference with Harman’s employment relationship was justified by Heartland Food’s right to protect its own legitimate business interests. We agree and reverse.
FACTS
The Interference With Contract Claim
In 1989,…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Texas Beef Cattle Co. v. GreenTexas Supreme Court · 1996
- Stuempges v. Parke, Davis & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Furlev Sales & Associates, Inc. v. North American Automotive Warehouse, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Kjesbo v. RicksSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
- Utecht v. Shopko Department StoreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Noble Systems Corp. v. Alorica Central, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2008
- Inline Packaging, LLC v. Graphic Packaging Int'l, LLCDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2018
- Marty H. Segelbaum, Inc. v. MW CAPITAL, LLCDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2009
- Glenn v. Daddy Rocks, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2001
- Inline Packaging, LLC v. Graphic Packaging International, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2016
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.