Counsel Concerns

Tortious-Interference Claims. The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey allowed a personal-management company to proceed with tortious-interference claims against the defendants, who are also attorneys. Source Entertainment Group LLC v. Baldonado & Associates P.C., 06-2706 (JBS). Source Enter- tainment had received parental acknowledgment and court approval of a management agreement with minor Tiffany Evans. Source obtained Evans a record deal with Sony Music and agency representation by William Morris. But Evans purportedly became unhappy with Source and entered into an agreement with attorneys Johnathan Sander and Hector Baldonado, Jr., who sent Source a management-agreement termination letter as well as copies of the letter to Source's professional contacts. Sander and Baldonado also became Evans' managers.

Sander and Baldonado argued in part that they were immune from tortious-interference liability because they had been acting as Evans's lawyers, and thus her agents under New Jersey law, when they sent out the termination correspondence. But the district court noted: 'Here, the proposed Amended Complaint alleges that Defendants interfered with Source's contractual relations at a time when Defendants did not have the authority to act on Tiffany's behalf ' Second, Source alleges that Defendants acted in furtherance of their personal gain when Defendants interfered with the Management Contract ' Taking all of the allegations of fact as true and construing them in a light most favorable to Source, as the Court must at this stage in the proceedings, Source's allegations state a claim for tortious interference.'

The district court also found the defendants could not rely on a litigation privilege as attorneys to dismiss a defamation claim by Source based on the letter they had sent to Source's industry contacts. The court emphasized that the letter was 'not intended to achieve the objects of any litigation,' despite the fact that it referred to a motion for instruction Tiffany's guardian ad litem had filed with the state chancery court and which resulted in an order vacating court approval of the Evans/Source management agreement.

Tortious-Interference Claims. The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey allowed a personal-management company to proceed with tortious-interference claims against the defendants, who are also attorneys. Source Entertainment Group LLC v. Baldonado & Associates P.C., 06-2706 (JBS). Source Enter- tainment had received parental acknowledgment and court approval of a management agreement with minor Tiffany Evans. Source obtained Evans a record deal with Sony Music and agency representation by William Morris. But Evans purportedly became unhappy with Source and entered into an agreement with attorneys Johnathan Sander and Hector Baldonado, Jr., who sent Source a management-agreement termination letter as well as copies of the letter to Source's professional contacts. Sander and Baldonado also became Evans' managers.

Sander and Baldonado argued in part that they were immune from tortious-interference liability because they had been acting as Evans's lawyers, and thus her agents under New Jersey law, when they sent out the termination correspondence. But the district court noted: 'Here, the proposed Amended Complaint alleges that Defendants interfered with Source's contractual relations at a time when Defendants did not have the authority to act on Tiffany's behalf ' Second, Source alleges that Defendants acted in furtherance of their personal gain when Defendants interfered with the Management Contract ' Taking all of the allegations of fact as true and construing them in a light most favorable to Source, as the Court must at this stage in the proceedings, Source's allegations state a claim for tortious interference.'

The district court also found the defendants could not rely on a litigation privilege as attorneys to dismiss a defamation claim by Source based on the letter they had sent to Source's industry contacts. The court emphasized that the letter was 'not intended to achieve the objects of any litigation,' despite the fact that it referred to a motion for instruction Tiffany's guardian ad litem had filed with the state chancery court and which resulted in an order vacating court approval of the Evans/Source management agreement.