California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Fusion Vape Bar v. Bankston, B259900 (Cal. App. 2016):
(3) an intentional act by the defendant, designed to disrupt the relationship; (4) actual disruption of the relationship; and (5) economic harm to the plaintiff proximately caused by the defendant's wrongful act." (Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP (2008) 44 Cal.4th 937, 944.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.