Reeves v. Hanlon
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BAXTER, J.
The primary issue presented is whether a defendant may be held liable under an intentional interference theory for having induced an at-will employee to quit working for the plaintiff. Because an interference as such is primarily an interference with the future relation between the plaintiff and the at-will employee, we hold that inducing the termination of an at-will employment relation may be actionable under the standard applicable to claims for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage. Accordingly, to recover for a defendant’s interference with an…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.California Supreme Court · 2003
- Quelimane Co. v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co.California Supreme Court · 1998
- MAI Systems Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Bear Stearns & Co.California Supreme Court · 1990
- Della Penna v. Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1995
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by122 opinions
- Diaz v. GatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2020
- Oakland Raiders v. National Football LeagueCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Das v. Bank of America, N.A.California Court of Appeal · 2010
- Sole Energy Co. v. Petrominerals Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2005
117 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.