Long v. Mount Carmel Health Sys.
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partKlatt, J.
{¶ 34} I concur with all sections of the majority decision except for the section addressing Long's claim for intentional interference with contract. I respectfully dissent from that section because I believe the majority's analysis contravenes binding precedent from the Supreme Court of Ohio.
{¶ 35} Traditionally, to prove tortious interference with contract, a plaintiff merely had to establish intentional interference. 3 Dobbs, Hayden, & Bublick, The Law of Torts , Section 620, at 510 (2d Ed. 2011). The defendant, then, "could escape liability only by showing a privilege and shouldering the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kenty v. Transamerica Premium InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- Fred Siegel Co., L.P.A. v. Arter & HaddenOhio Supreme Court · 1999
- A & B-Abell Elevator Co. v. Columbus/Central Ohio Building & Construction Trades CouncilOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- Juhasz v. Quik Shops, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1977
- Walter v. Adt Security Sys., 06ap-115 (6-29-2007)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2007
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.