White Plains Coat & Apron Co. v. Cintas Corp.

867 N.E.2d 381 (2007)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
W
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

White Plains Coat & Apron Co. v. Cintas Corp.

New York Court of Appeals
867 N.E.2d 381 (2007)

SC
Play video

Facts

White Plains Coat & Apron Company, Inc. (White Plains) (plaintiff) had five-year exclusive service contracts with many of its clients. Cintas Corporation (Cintas) (defendant) was a competitor to White Plains and contracted with many of White Plains’s clients during the pendency of the five-year contracts, causing the clients to breach their contracts with White Plains. White Plains sued Cintas for tortious interference with contract in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Cintas claimed that it was unaware of any contractual relationships between White Plains and the clients. The district court granted Cintas’s motion for summary judgment. The court found, among other things, that Cintas had a legitimate interest as a competitor in soliciting business and making a profit, and thus was entitled to the economic interest defense to White Plains’s tortious interference claim. On appeal, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified a question to the Court of Appeals of New York on whether a generalized economic interest in soliciting business is a defense to a claim of tortious interference with an existing contract for an alleged tortfeasor who has no previous economic relationship with the breaching party.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Kaye, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 802,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Contracts

Key Terms