Kingsbury v. Overholt

BECKERT, J.,

The question before us in the instant matter is whether plaintiffs’ complaint sets forth a cause of action by pleading the necessary elements of the tort of intentional interference with a prospective contractual relationship.

The factual background of this case, as pleaded in plaintiffs’ complaint, arises out of a situation involving the sale of a parcel of land formerly owned by Joseph E. Cloak and Catherine, his wife (Cloak). Darwin S. Overholt (Overholt), defendant, acted as agent for the Cloaks in the sale of the land. Stuart Kingsbury, Jr., and Dale F. James (plaintiffs)…