- 12 -
misrepresentation, breach of a fiduciary duty, unauthorized use
of confidential information, defamation, and unwarranted
criminal prosecutions. See id. at 846; see also American Bldg.
Co. v. Pascoe Bldg. Sys., Inc., 392 S.E.2d 860 (Ga. Ct. App.
1990); Architectural Manufacturing Co. of Am. v. Airotec, Inc.,
166 S.E.2d 744 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969) (misrepresentations as to a
company’s financial solvency are improper means and may
constitute an element of tortious interference). Petitioners
would have us assume that out of the evidence submitted to the
jury the only “improper means” employed by the defendants, and
established at trial, was conduct that injured Mr. Anderson’s
business reputation. However, the facts in this case do not
permit us to make such an assumption.
Although the statements by the defendants may have been
slanderous and damaging to Mr. Anderson’s business reputation,
they constituted but one of several sources from which the jury
could have decided the existence of tortious interference with
business relationships. At trial, Mr. Anderson introduced
copious amounts of evidence in the form of customer lists,
invoices, profit/loss statements, tax returns, and witness
testimony to show how the defendants’ improper conduct
contributed to his loss of business and loss of profits. The
jury could have concluded from the evidence that the
defendants: (1) Perpetrated the unauthorized use of Carrera’s
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011