Qwest Communications Co. v. Free Conferencing Corp., No. 17-2412 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseFC appealed the district court's judgment in favor of Qwest, finding FC was liable for tortious interference with Qwest's contractual relationship with Tekstar. The Eighth Circuit held that the district court did not err in finding that FC caused Tekstar to breach its tariff with Qwest; the breach was material; FC's justification defense was rejected where the district court did not clearly err in finding that, prior to contracting with Tekstar, FC was on notice that it was not an end user and that Tekstar would violate its tariff by charging Qwest tariff rates for FC’s traffic; the district court's conclusion was not precluded by collateral estoppel; the district court did not clearly err in finding that the nearly $1 million Qwest paid to AT&T and other long-distance carriers to route FC's traffic flowed directly from FC's tortious interference; and there was no error in the district court's award of attorney's fees to Qwest.
Court Description: Kelly, Author, with Shepherd and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Tortious Interference with Contracts. The district court did not err in finding defendant induced a third party to breach the tariff agreement between the third party and plaintiff; the breach was material; the district court did not err in determining defendant failed to establish the affirmative defense of justification; the decision was not barred by collateral estoppel; damages award and attorney's fee award affirmed. Judge Shepherd, dissenting.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.