Outrageous Conduct in Business
The Eastern Section Court of Appeals issued a new case this week on outrageous conduct in business. The Plaintiff in Lane v. Lane claimed he owned a share of his father's car dealership, but that when the dealership was sold, his father, the purchaser and others conspired to deprive the Plaintiff of his share of the sales proceeds. The Plaintiff sued the lot of them, claiming everything from conversion to conspiracy.
The Plaintiff also tried to make out a claim of outrageous conduct, claiming some degree of mental injury as a result of the Defendants' business conduct. The trial court dismissed the outrageous conduct claim. The trial court ruled, and the Court of Appeals affirmed, that the Defendants had done nothing “so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.” (quoting Lourcey v. Estate of Scarlett, 146 S.W.3d 48, 51 (Tenn. 2004) (internal citations omitted).
I can imagine a purely business decision that might give rise to an outrageous conduct claim. Those are, by definition, the exception rather than the rule. People in business break deals and fail to deliver on contracts. Reasonable persons attempt to work out their differences when those situations arise, and if they cannot reach a compromise, litigation is appropriate to determine who is right and the degree of economic impact caused by the person who is wrong. Making a claim for outrageous conduct in business, however, requires leaping a very high hurdle to prove egregious conduct. From the facts recited by the Court, this case didn't have a chance of making it over that hurdle.