Torts—Intentional Interference with Contractual Relationship—Malicious Interference with Attorney-Client Relationship

Authors

anon

Abstract

The Washington Supreme court recently decided a case having personal as well as professional interest to the legal profession. Plaintiff, an attorney, was requested by a widow to make arrangements whereby she could continue her deceased husband's business, and initiated probate of the husband's estate. Defendants, tax consultants and certified public accountants, were later retained by the widow to perform the estate's tax work. At defendant's urging, the widow selected another attorney from a list furnished by defendants and terminated plaintiff's employment. Plaintiff, upon inquiry, was informed by defendants that they hired and fired attorneys for their clients. Plaintiff sued for damages in the amount of his expectable attorney's fees, alleging that defendants had intentionally interfered with his employment contract. On appeal from a judgment for plaintiff, held: The defense of privilege is not available to a third party who maliciously interferes with a contract terminable at will. Calbom v. Knudtzon, 65 Wash. Dec.2d 137, 396 P.2d 148 (1964).

First Page

382

Recommended Citation

anon, Washington Case Law, Torts—Intentional Interference with Contractual Relationship—Malicious Interference with Attorney-Client Relationship, 40 Wash. L. Rev. 382 (1965).
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol40/iss2/19