|
4267 Without evidence that a defendant intended an email in which he made statements about plaintiff that allegedly damaged plaintiff's business relationship with a third party knew of the relationship, intended the email to reach the third party, and intended it to disrupt the relationship, or that the email was sent in breach of a duty owed to plaintiff, defendant cannot be liable for tortious interference with contract; defendant's statement that he believed plaintiff was on the brink of bankruptcy accompanied by recitation of the facts on which defendant based the belief was an expression of opinion, and liability for defamation will not attach unless the facts recited by defendant were false; in an action for defamation based upon statements made in connection with an issue of public interest, plaintiff has the burden of establishing falsity.CitationINTEGRATED v FITZGIBBONS (Hospital Acquisition) 140 CA4 515 [See: CCP 425.16; CivC 45; B&PC 17200 etseq; Damon v Ocean Hills 85 CA4 468, T/AT 1/01; Philadelphia Newspapers v Heppe 475 US 767; Reeves v Hanlon 33 C4 1140, T/AT 9/04]
|
|
