Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ultramar Energy Ltd. v. Chase Manhattan Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided January 30, 1992Published

1DissentWallach, J.

I agree with the majority that the IAS court correctly dismissed the second cause of action for tortious interference with contract. A party is, after all, privileged to interfere with performance of a contract in order to protect a right equal or superior to the plaintiff’s, inasmuch as such a showing would overcome the element of malice which is necessary to such a claim (Felsen v Sol Cafe Mfg. Corp., 24 NY2d 682). "Such a cause of action requires the existence of a valid contract *594between the plaintiff and a third party, the defendant’s knowledge of that contract, and its intentional…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ball v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
  2. Felsen v. Sol Cafe Manufacturing Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1969
  3. S&S Hotel Ventures Ltd. Partnership v. 777 S.H. Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
  4. Frommer v. FrommerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  5. Reldan Trading Corp. v. ABC Films, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API