Holly Johnston v. Kimberly-Clark Global Sales, LLC

Good Law
542 F. App'x 600
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 17, 201316-16548California526 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Holly Johnston appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of Kimberly-Clark Global Sales, LLC in her diversity action alleging intentional interference with economic relations under Oregon law. We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party to determine whether any genuine issues of material fact remain. Coszalter v. City of Salem, 320 F.3d 968, 973 (9th Cir.2003). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We reverse and remand.

Oregon law governs this dispute. To establish a claim for intentional interference with economic relations in Oregon, a plaintiff must prove: (1) the existence of a professional or business relationship; (2) intentional interference with that relationship; (3) by a third party; (4) accomplished through improper means or for an improper purpose; (5) a causal effect between the interference and damage to the economic relationship; and (6) damages. McGanty v. Staudenraus, 321 Or. 532 , 901 P.2d 841, 844 (1995). On appeal, the parties dispute whether Johnston was required to produce admissible evidence that Kimberly-Clark was solely motivated by…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.