Rural Development, Inc. v. Stone

OPINION

BENAVIDES, Justice.

This cause reaches our Court as a suit for tortious interference with a contractual relationship. The jury found that appellant Durham interfered with the contractual rights of appellee and that Durham’s acts were outside the scope of his authority as an officer of the corporate defendant Rural Development, Inc. We reverse the judgment entered on the jury’s verdict and render judgment that appellee take nothing from Durham individually.

On behalf of himself as an individual, and as vice-president of Rural Development Incorporated, Stephen Wright entered into the…