KEYSTONE METAL MOLDING, ETC. v. R & W METALS
| Citation | 486 F. Supp. 813 |
| Decision Date | 27 March 1980 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. C78-543A. |
| Parties | KEYSTONE METAL MOLDING COMPANY, INC., a Michigan Corporation, Plaintiff, v. R & W METALS COMPANY, a Georgia Corporation, W. R. G. Inc., an Ohio Corporation, Alvin A. Goldstein, Carl Rausch, James Kovacs, Richard Wylie, Michael Hall, John Doe, and XYZ Corporation, Jointly and Severally, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Georgia |
John R. Nicholson and Gene J. Esshaki, Abbott, Nicholson, Quilter & Esshaki, Detroit, Mich., Randall L. Hughes and Law Offices of Edwin Marger, Ellwood F. Oakley, III, Atlanta, Ga., for plaintiff.
Robert O. Davies and Law Offices of Edwin Marger, J. Timothy Lawler, Atlanta, Ga., for defendants.
This action alleging a civil conspiracy to commit fraud by the corporate and individual Defendants is now before the Court on Defendants R & W Metals' and Wylie's Motion for Reconsideration of this Court's Order of December 5, 1979 in which the Court dismissed the Counterclaims of these two Defendants.
In support of their Motion for Reconsideration, said Defendants urge that the counterclaims which were dismissed (R & W Metals' Second Counterclaim and Wylie's First Counterclaim, which are identical) state claims for civil conspiracy to interfere with Defendants' business. The factual essence of these counterclaims, to the extent relevant here,1 is that respondent Keystone caused the FBI to undertake criminal investigation of R & W and its officers and employees. The subject counterclaims do not allege that Keystone gave false information to the FBI, or that Keystone lacked belief that a crime had been committed; however, it is alleged that Keystone's motivation in causing the investigation to be instigated was to harm R & W, a competitor of Keystone's. The counterclaims further allege that the FBI's investigation, which included confiscation of R & W's business records, disrupted its business and damaged its reputation.
In the Court's opinion, the counterclaims do not set forth a cause of action for wrongful interference with business. The Court does not interpret the cases cited by Defendants in their brief, principally NAACP v. Overstreet, 221 Ga. 16, 142 S.E.2d 816 (1965) to hold that malice plus injury constitutes a cause of action. Rather, an independent wrongful act is required, as well as injury.
Causing an FBI investigation to be instigated is not wrongful per se, even if same is motivated by ill will. In order to determine under what circumstances it would be actionable, one must look to the appropriate substantive law area, in this case that of malicious prosecution and malicious abuse of process. Since an essential element of a cause of action for malicious prosecution (also known as malicious use of process) is lack of probable cause, Ellis v. Knowles, 90 Ga.App. 40, 81...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hayes v. Irwin
...interference with business. Rather, an independent wrongful act is required as well as an injury. Keystone Metal Moulding Co., Inc. v. R & W Metals Co., 486 F.Supp. 813 (N.D.Ga.1980). The line between tortious interference and mere competitive effort is frequently difficult to ascertain. To......
- Service Employees Intern. Union, Local No. 36, AFL-CIO v. Office Center Services, Inc.
-
Edwards v. Sea-Land Service, Inc.
...Act)." Gas Workers Local No. 80 v. Mich. Consolidated Gas, 503 F.Supp. 155, 157 (E.D.Mich.1980); Keystone Metal Molding, Etc. v. R. & W. Metals, 486 F.Supp. 813 (D.Mont.1980). Moreover, in the case at bar Texas law need not apply since this action, by Plaintiffs' own admission, involves int......
-
Analytical Systems v. ITT Commercial Finance
...that an independent wrongful act is to be identified by reference to the substantive law of Georgia. Keystone Metal Molding, Inc. v. R & W Metals, 486 F.Supp. 813, 815 (N.D.Ga.1980). In looking to the substantive law of Georgia, the traditional torts of malicious use and abuse of process ha......