Sunday, April 20, 2008

A Third Party Interference Case In Anderson, Indiana

The Anderson Herald Bulletin's reports on a slightly different sort of third party interference with contract. However, after reading Pepelea wants $75K from city, I am have some major questions.

On the face of it this is a good case of third-party interference with a contract except for one thing. Was there a contract between the city and Anthem which gave Pepelea any rights?

After the contract was approved, it was sent to Anthem officials for them to sign. An unknown city employee contacted Anthem officials and told them to put the contract on hold until Jan. 1, when Ockomon, a Democrat, took office, according to the notice.
That paragraph contributes only massive confusion. I have written about third party interference here. If you read that article, you can see that at least two elements are at the least questionable: a valid, existing contract and who did the interfering.

Not that Pepelea is out of luck entirely. Without a contract, Pepelea would have a case for
intentional interference with a business relationship and/or interference with a prospective advantage. If his attorney remembered to add these claims to the tort claims notice.