• Homepage
»
• Torts
»
• Other Torts

26. Should the court grant the motion?

The established cemetery has sued the former employee for tortious interference with contract. The former employee has moved for summary judgment, based on the foregoing facts.

Shortly after the promotion began, several purchasers of funeral plans with the established cemetery canceled their plans and purchased plans from the new cemetery. When the established cemetery withheld penalties from the refund amounts, the purchasers objected and threatened to notify the state consumer protection bureau.

A former high-level employee of the cemetery, who knew of the limitations specified in the state statute, recently built a new cemetery near the established cemetery. To promote the new cemetery, the former employee sent postcards to local residents asserting that anyone who had already purchased a pre-need funeral plan had «an unlimited right to cancel that plan at any time, for any reason, without penalty.» The postcard also offered a $100 rebate on a pre-need funeral plan with the new cemetery to anyone who canceled an existing plan elsewhere.

An established cemetery sells «pre-need» funeral plans, which include funeral services, a casket, and a burial plot, in exchange for advance payment. By state statute, any purchaser of a funeral plan of this sort can cancel the purchase at any time, subject to a penalty imposed by the seller of up to 15% of the purchase price.