Edward Springer v. Ausbern Construction Co., Inc.

Summary

The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ judgment in favor of Edward Springer on Ausbern Construction’s tortious-interference claim because Ausbern presented no evidence of malice, an essential element of the tort. The court held that a tortious-interference claim against a governmental employee in an individual capacity is not subject to the Mississippi Tort Claims Act’s presuit notice requirements. The court overruled Whiting v. University of Southern Mississippi to the extent it held otherwise, while concluding that Whiting did not implicitly overrule Zumwalt or McGehee.

Holdings

1. Whiting did not silently overrule Zumwalt or McGehee, but Whiting is overruled to the extent it held that a claim for tortious interference with a contract is subject to the Mississippi Tort Claims Act's presuit notice requirements.
2. Ausbern's claim against Springer in his individual capacity for tortious interference with the contract was not subject to the Tort Claims Act's presuit notice requirements, and the trial court properly denied Springer's motion to dismiss on that ground.
3. The judgment for Springer was affirmed because the evidence did not establish malice, an essential element of Ausbern's tortious-interference claim.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a claim for tortious interference with a contract brought against a governmental employee in his individual capacity is subject to the Mississippi Tort Claims Act's presuit notice requirements.
2. Whether Whiting v. University of Southern Mississippi implicitly overruled Zumwalt v. Jones County Board of Supervisors regarding Tort Claims Act treatment of tortious-interference claims.
3. Whether the judgment for Springer should be affirmed because Ausbern failed to prove malice, an essential element of tortious interference with a contract.

Disposition

affirmed