Re: Brinks Security System Monitoring For Less

["Robert L Bass" <RobertLBass@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

"I brive a dus" wrote:
>
> 10 point deduction for using Bob Campbell's Canenglish
>
> tortuous
>
> Main Entry:
>     tor·tu·ous Listen to the pronunciation of tortuous
> Pronunciation:
>     \Ë?toÌ?rch-wÉ?s, Ë?toÌ?r-chÉ?-\
> Function:
>     adjective
> Etymology:
>     Middle English, from Middle French tortueux, from Latin tortuosus, from
> tortus twist, from torquÄ?re to twist
> Date:
>     15th century
>
> 1: marked by repeated twists, bends, or turns : winding <a tortuous
> path>2 a: marked by devious or indirect tactics : crooked, tricky <a
> tortuous conspiracy> b: circuitous, involved <the tortuous jargon of
> legal forms>

That is the correct definition of tortuous.  No problem there.  However, the
legal term in question is tortious interference.  Following are quotes from
some of the online legal dictionaries:

1. "tortious interference -- The causing of harm by disrupting something that
belongs to someone else -- for example, interfering with a contractual
relationship so that one party fails to deliver goods on time."

2. "TORTIOUS/WRONGFUL INTERFERENCE (IN BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP) - The theory of
the tort or wrong of interference is that the law draws a line beyond which no
one may go in intentionally intermeddling with the business affairs of others.
So, a systematic effort to induce employees to leave their present employment
and take work with another is unlawful when the purpose of such enticement is
to cripple or destroy their employer rather than to obtain their skills and
services in the legitimate furtherance of one's own business enterprise."

"It also becomes unlawful when the inducement is made through the use of
untruthful means, or for the purpose of having the employees commit wrongs
such as disclosing the former employer's trade secrets. "

"It is not unlawful or improper, standing alone, to hire away someone else's
employee so long as the person doing so wants to use the employee's services
in advancing his own business rather than with the intent of destroying the
other employer's business. This is true regardless of how much the loss of the
employee may inconvenience his former employer. The mere fact that someone's
activity has injured another in his business does not mean that the latter may
recover because, in a free enterprise system, a businessman has no legal
complaint concerning a loss resulting from lawful competition, including
competition for the services of skilled employees. If the means of competition
are fair, the advantage gained should remain where success has put it."

3. Interference With Contractual or Business Relations: The Business Claim
"In recent years much commercial litigation in Georgia has involved claims for
tortious interference with contractual or other business relations. This type
of claim is based on the notion that the possessor of a contract or other
property right is entitled to pursue a claim against an intermeddler who
adversely affects those property rights. This claim was originally applied in
an English case reported in 1853 where a singer under contract to sing at the
plaintiff's theater was induced by the defendant, who operated a rival
theater, to break her contract. The court held that the plaintiff was entitled
to recover money damages from the rival theater owner for his interference
with the singer's contract, which was essentially a form of unlawful
competition. Since that case, this type of claim has been applied in a wide
variety of business contexts. "

"The Georgia Code states the basic principle that "every act of another which
unlawfully interferes with the enjoyment of personal property is a tort for
which an action shall lie." The courts have further defined the claim of
tortious interference to require proof that the defendant did the following:
(1) acted improperly and without privilege; (2) acted purposefully and
maliciously with intent to injure; (3) induced a third party or parties not to
enter into or continue a business relationship with the plaintiff; and (4)
caused the plaintiff some financial injury. In order to support a claim for
tortious interference with contract, there must also be proof of a contractual
relationship. A claim for tortious interference with business relations,
however, may be actionable even when there is no contract. "Business
relations" has been broadly defined to include inchoate rights which a party
has or hopes to have."

"One limiting element imposed by the courts on this potentially wide-ranging
doctrine is that the defendant must be a stranger to the relationship alleged
to have been harmed. This follows the notion that one who is involved in the
relationship at issue, prior to the alleged interference, cannot be said to be
an intermeddler. While the Georgia courts have employed this doctrine to
dismiss various claims, the courts have disregarded this requirement where the
evidence tends to show that the defendant has acted in bad faith or engaged in
other intentional misconduct."

"Tortious interference claims are often pursued in actions between competing
businesses. Some examples of actions which may give rise to liability include
inducing customers to breach a contract with a competitor, mass hirings of
employees from a competitor or making false statements about a competitor to
lure customers or employees away."

" As with any tort claim, recoverable damages include all damages proximately
caused by the misconduct, whether such damages were foreseeable or not. This
is in contrast to the amount of damages recoverable for breach of contract
which is limited to foreseeable damages. Successful claimants may potentially
recover, in addition to actual damages, general damages, attorney's fees and,
where egregious wrongdoing has occurred, punitive damages. "
"Defenses to tortious interference claims include various privileges, such as
the privilege of fair competition. It has long been recognized that fair
competition is always legal. An employee, after leaving employment, may, so
long as he does not use his former employer's trade secrets, avail himself of
whatever expertise he has acquired from his former employer, may compete for
the same customer dollars, may even go to customers who have been procured for
the former employer and endeavor to persuade them to change their trade to his
advantage. Even the destruction of a competing business by means of attracting
its customers in the fair course of competition is not actionable. (To protect
themselves from such a calamity, many employers use employment contracts
containing restrictive covenants.) "
"The touchstone for liability under this tort is a showing of some improper or
illegal action as an intermeddler. Businesses should therefore evaluate
whether contemplated actions could be construed to have an appearance of
impropriety which could expose the company to tortious interference claims. "

There's more.  Happy hunting...

--

Regards,
Robert L Bass

==============================>
Bass Home Electronics
4883 Fallcrest Circle
Sarasota · Florida · 34233
http://www.bassburglaralarms.com
Sales & Tech Support 941-925-8650
Customer Service 941-870-2310
Fax 941-870-3252
==============================>