In 1980, the New York Court of Appeals adopted §766 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts as the standard for a cause of action for tortious interference with contract in New York. Guard-Life v. S. Parker Hardware Mfg., 50 N.Y.2d 183, 189-90 (1980); see Alken Indus. v. Toxey Leonard & Assocs., 2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 31864(U), at *5 (Suffolk Co. Aug. 2, 2013). The Restatement defines tortious interference with contract as “intentionally and improperly interfer[ing] with the performance of a contract… between another and a third person by inducing or otherwise causing the third person not to perform the contract.” Restatement (Second) of Torts §766 (Am. L. Inst. 1977). The requirement in this definition of “inducing or otherwise causing” the third person not to perform its contract has been extensively litigated in New York courts, which have required a somewhat heightened pleading standard for that element.
Read the full New York Law Journal article, "Pleading the element of inducement for tortious interference with contract claims."
Publication
Most incidents handled by our Norton Rose Fulbright cyber team originate from the customer’s service provider. In many cases it is the service provider’s systems, infrastructure and environment which proves to be the most vulnerable to cyber breaches and security issues.
Publication
The Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA) is now half way through its first phase of compliance, while the supporting regulatory frameworks constituting the building blocks for the CORSIA and Article 6 markets are incrementally being cemented in place and the market is developing fair mechanisms for managing key gap risks.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2025
