Fasco Industries, Inc. v. Armbruster Products, Inc.

The concurring opinion previously issued is withdrawn and the following is substituted in its place.

I concur in the affirmance of the appeal but would reverse as to the cross-appeal. I write to address two issues raised. First, appellant contends that it should have received a directed verdict in its favor on ap-pellee’s claim of intentional interference with a contract/business relationship because it had acted in good faith reliance on the advice of counsel in asserting a legally protected interest in its license agreement in a patent. It first claims that it cannot be charged with…