Conte v. Emmons

Anthony Conte (plaintiff) owned I Media, a company that produced and distributed a magazine. Route distributors paid Conte upfront for the exclusive rights to distribute magazines in defined areas. When certain route distributors paid but did not receive any magazines to distribute, the distributors contacted the Nassau County District Attorney’s Office with their concerns. Prosecutors Robert Emmons and William Wallace and investigator Michael Falzarno (collectively, investigators) (defendants) looked into the complaints. Conte was not charged. When I Media subsequently failed, Conte sued the investigators for, among other things, tortious interference with contracts between I Media and its route distributors, printers, and advertisers. Conte proceeded pro se. At trial, Conte adduced evidence that Falzarno disliked Conte. On one occasion, Falzarno had shaken Conte’s hand in an aggressive manner while serving a subpoena. Falzarno also told one of Conte’s route distributors that Conte was a scam artist. Conte adduced evidence that Wallace contacted some of Conte’s counterparties and told them that Conte was under investigation for fraud. Conte adduced no evidence that the investigators had a personal interest in the subject contracts’ breaches. The investigators moved for judgment as a matter of law at the close of the evidence. The district court denied that motion. The district court properly instructed the jury on the elements of Conte’s tortious-interference claim. The jury found in Conte’s favor. The investigators renewed their motion for judgment as a matter of law. The district court denied that motion and entered judgment on the jury’s verdict. The investigators appealed to the Second Circuit.