New York Recognizes At-Will Employees' Right to Bring Tortious Interference Claims in Limited Circumstances
New York law does recognize that "the at-will relationship entails certain limited rights, including the right to maintain an action for tortious interference in certain limited situations." Kanhoye v. Altana Inc., 686 F.Supp.2d 199, 214 (E.D.N.Y. 2009).
Under New York law, the elements of tortious interference with a business relationship are: (1) the plaintiff had business relations with a third party; (2) the defendant interfered with those business relations; (3) the defendant acted for a wrongful purpose or used dishonest, unfair, or improper means; and (4) the defendant's acts injured the relationship. RFP LLC v. SCVNGR, Inc., 788 F.Supp.2d 191 (S.D.N.Y. 2011).
In New York, an at-will employee may only maintain an action for tortious interference with the at-will employment relationship against a co-employee by showing that the co-employee acted outside the scope of his or her authority by inducing the employer to terminate. Kanhoye v. Altana Inc., 686 F.Supp.2d 199 (E.D.N.Y. 2009); See Mahmud v. Kaufmann, 607 F.Supp.2d 541 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)(Under New York law, a plaintiff cannot maintain a tortious interference claim against her employer because an employer cannot be liable for interfering with its own relationship with its employee). A supervisor is considered to have acted outside the scope of his employment as would give rise to liability for tortious interference for inducing employer to terminate at-will employee if there is evidence that the supervisor's manner of interference involved independent tortious acts such as fraud or misrepresentations, or that he acted purely from malice or self interest. Kanhoye v. Altana Inc., 686 F.Supp.2d 199 (E.D.N.Y. 2009).
Employee could not circumvent at-will employment rule, namely, that she could freely be discharged at any time with or without cause, by casting her cause of action against her former co-workers and supervisor as one for tortious interference with employment, absent injury independent of termination. Barcellos v. Robbins, 50 A.D.3d 934, 858 N.Y.S.2d 658 (N.Y.A.D. 2 Dept. 2008). Discharged employee's conclusory allegations that her former co-workers and supervisor made "false and malicious" statements in their "libelous" campaign against her, without more, were insufficient to place their actions outside scope of their employment for purposes of stating claim for tortious interference with employment. Id. Inasmuch as the length of employment is not a material term of at-will employment, a party cannot be injured merely by the termination of her employment. Id.
If you believe that someone unlawfully interfered with your employment, it's smart to contact an New York Employment Attorney as soon as possible to preserve all your legal rights.
