Tortious Interference Claim Fails Against Party to Contract

On July 26, 2021, Justice Andrew Borrok of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Schorsch v. Luxor Capital Partners, LP, 2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 50698(U), dismissing a claim for tortious interference brought against a party to the contract allegedly interfered with, explaining:

With respect to the claim for tortious interference with contract against Luxor (second cause of action), that claim must be dismissed because the plaintiffs argue that the creditor trust is the successor to RCAP and it is well settled under New York law that a party cannot interfere with its own contract (Ahead Realty LLC v India House, Inc., 92 AD3d 424, 425 [1st Dept 2012] ["asserting that a defendant tortiously interfered with its own contract' quite clearly does not state a legally sufficient cause of action.'"]). The claim for tortious interference with contract against Mr. Conboy personally is also dismissed, without prejudice, because the amended complaint fails to allege that Mr. Conboy acted with malice or illegalityoutside of his role at Luxor (see Collins v E-Magine, LLC, 291 AD2d 350, 351 [1st Dept2002] [""[E]conomic interest precludes a claim for tortious interference with a contract unlessthere is a showing of malice or illegality . . . ."]).

The attorneys at Schlam Stone & Dolan LLP frequently litigate claims for tortious interference. Contact the Commercial Division Blog Committee at commercialdivisionblog@schlamstone.com if you or a client have questions concerning a tortious interference claim.