- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Tort Law
- Date Filed: 03-11-2020
- Case #: A163230
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Armstrong, P.J., for the Court; Shorr, J.; & Sercombe, S.J.
- Full Text Opinion
Plaintiff appealed a limited judgment by the trial court granting Defendants' motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff assigned error to the trial court's grant of summary judgment on intentional interference with economic relations and defamation per se. On appeal, Plaintiff argued that there was sufficient evidence to present a genuine issue of material fact for the claim of interference, and that Fogel's messages were defamatory per se. In response, Defendants argued that the record lacked evidence of at least one element of interference because there was no documentation of specific communications of a separate interference, and that Plaintiffs presented no evidence to dispute the claims in Fogel's messages. "An interference in another party's contractual or other economic relations is tortious only if it is 'wrongful by some measure beyond the fact of the interference itself,' such as by improper means or improper motive." Northwest Natural Gas Co. v. Chase Gardens, Inc., 328 Or 487, 498, 982 P2d 1117 (1999). The Court held that the trial court erred in granting the motion for summary judgment as to interference claims because there was sufficient showing of a genuine issue of material facts on each element of the claim; and that it erred in granting summary judgment on the defamation per se claim because it is the factfinder's role to determine whether a statement could be perceived as true. Limited judgment reversed on claims of defamation per se and interference with economic relations; otherwise affirmed.