Contract News

Breach Of Contract

The courts recognize a claim for damages when someone induces a breach of contract or interferes with financial expectancies. An improper motive such as fraud or duress is usually required. Most authorities find that mere persuasion or entreaty is not enough (Connecticut Law of Torts, chapter XIX, § 165).

For intentional interference with contractual relations, the plaintiff must have a contract with a third person and the third person must be induced to break the contract with the plaintiff.

Interference with a business relationship requires (1) a business relationship between the plaintiff and another party, (2) the defendant’s intentional interference with the business relationship while knowing of the relationship, and (3) actual loss by the plaintiff due to the interference (Hi-Ho Tower, Inc. v. Com-Tronics, Inc. , 255 Conn. 20 (2000)). There must be a direct relationship between the defendant’s act and the plaintiff’s loss and a reasonable expectation of receiving a profit in the prospective transaction. A mere possibility of making a profit is not enough (Connecticut Law of Torts, chapter XIX, § 165).

Contact our Massachusetts Contract Lawyer Now!

	Did You Know?
	Parol Evidence Rule' Forbids The Change Of Terms Of A Written Contract The parol evidence rule enacts a principle of the common law of contracts that presumes that a written contract covers the agreement between the parties involved. It forbids the introduction of extrinsic evidence which would change the terms of a written contract.