California First-Year Law Students' Exam (Baby Bar) — MCTortsHard
A renowned concert pianist, known for their unique performance style, was booked to perform at a prestigious music festival. A rival pianist, envious of the booking, anonymously contacted the festival organizers and falsely claimed that the renowned pianist had a history of canceling performances at the last minute due to substance abuse, providing fabricated evidence. As a result, the festival canceled the renowned pianist's appearance, causing significant financial loss and damage to their professional reputation. The renowned pianist sued the rival pianist. Which tort is most appropriate for the renowned pianist to pursue?
- ADefamation
- BIntentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
- CInterference with Contractual Relations
- DInterference with Prospective Economic Advantage
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: C. Interference with Contractual Relations
Interference with Contractual Relations occurs when a third party intentionally and improperly induces one party to breach a contract with another. Here, the rival pianist intentionally used false information to induce the festival to cancel its contract with the renowned pianist.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. While defamation is also likely applicable due to the false statements, the direct interference with an existing contract makes Interference with Contractual Relations a stronger and more direct claim for the lost booking.
- B. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress requires extreme and outrageous conduct causing severe emotional distress, which might be present but is not the primary focus of the economic harm here.
- D. Interference with prospective economic advantage applies to future business relationships, not existing contracts.
Interference with Contractual Relations
An intentional tort where a third party improperly induces a party to a contract to breach that contract, resulting in damages to the other contracting party.
- Requires a valid contract between plaintiff and a third party.
- Defendant must know of the contract.
- Defendant must intentionally induce the third party to breach or make performance impossible.
- Defendant's conduct must be improper (e.g., fraud, malice).
- Plaintiff must suffer damages.
Memory trick: Don't Interfere with Contracts or Prospectives.