Frank Coulson, Inc. Buick v. Trumbull
| Decision Date | 27 February 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 74--1342,74--1342 |
| Citation | 328 So.2d 271 |
| Parties | FRANK COULSON, INC.--BUICK, Appellant, v. Florine E. TRUMBULL, as Executrix of the Estate of George T. Trumbull, Deceased, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
F. Kendall Slinkman of Farish & Farish, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Marjorie D. Gadarian of Jones, Paine & Foster, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Appellant, Frank Coulson, Inc.--Buick, sued appellee, George T. Trumbull, in two counts, one for libel and the other for intentional interference with an advantageous business relationship. At the end of the plaintiff's case the trial court directed a defense verdict on the libel count. The interference count suffered the same fate at the close of all of the evidence in the case. Coulson appeals from a final judgment based upon the directed verdicts.
Appellant's claims arose out of several letters written by appellee to executives of General Motors Corporation in which appellee passed on to General Motors allegedly false information about appellant, a Buick automobile dealership. One of the letters addressed to an executive of the Buick division stated in material part:
'Mr. Franklin Clements has informed me of the deplorable conditions existing at the Coulson Buick Agency, Delray Beach, Florida. The physical condition is not properly maintained. The service is very bad and in some instances it has taken six weeks to get parts. The attitude of the personnel is negative. The owner is seldom on the job. In other words, the agency is in a mess.
Appellant alleged that as a result of these communications from appellee (which appellee knew or should have known were false), General Motors became highly critical of appellant's agency and eventually forced appellant to sell the agency at a price far below its true value.
Our review of the record discloses evidence which, viewed in the light most favorable to appellant, would support findings that: (a) appellee's informant did not tell him that competitive products were being purchased because of the bad condition of the agency or that the agency was in 'deplorable condition' or that it was 'in a mess'; (b) appellee had no personal knowledge of the dealership, the attitude of its personnel, its modus operandi, or any of its other features; (c) as a result of the communications in question appellant was virtually drummed out of the corps by General Motors; (d) appellant was forced to sell its Buick agency at a price substantially below the true value of the agency; 1 (e) appellant had legal rights arising out of an existing business relationship and appellee was guilty of an intentional and unjustified interference with that relationship, as a result of which appellant suffered damage. Thus, we conclude that appellant made a prima facie case for intentional inference with an advantageous business relationship, thereby requiring presentation of that issue to the jury for resolution. John B. Reid & Associates, Inc. v. Jiminez, Fla.App.1965, 181 So.2d 575.
In arguing...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc. v. Cotton
...appeared in the decisions of other of our sister courts, as evidenced by the Fourth District's decision in Frank Coulson, Inc.-Buick v. Trumbull, 328 So.2d 271 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), involving the issue of the liability of a defendant who induced a third party, General Motors, to sever a busi......
-
Axelrod v. Califano, EE-88
...supra; Coogler v. Rhodes, supra; Arison Shipping Company v. Smith, 311 So.2d 739 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); and Frank Coulson, Inc. Buick v. Trumbull, 328 So.2d 271 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). Summary judgment serves to expedite the settlement of litigation where it affirmatively appears on the record th......
-
Glynn v. City of Kissimmee
...& Parker v. Copeland, 51 So.2d 789 (Fla.1951); Axelrod v. Califano, 357 So.2d 1048 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968); Frank Coulson, Inc.-Buick v. Trummbull, 328 So.2d 271 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). In this case, there are material questions of fact as to whether the statements were made with malice or to too ......
-
Riggs v. Cain
...of cases predicated on such a defense, especially where the truth of the statements made is at issue. Frank Coulson, Inc.-Buick v. Trummbull, 328 So.2d 271 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Moseley v. City Gas Company of Florida, 310 So.2d 390 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). We believe an employer may claim a qual......