>>177676

>Important Considerations: Legal Action: If the lock is unjustified, you may have legal grounds to sue for "intentional interference with prospective economic advantage"

In Washington state, intentional interference with prospective economic advantage (or business expectancy) is a tort occurring when a party wrongfully disrupts a valid business relationship or expectancy with a third party, causing economic harm. It requires proving an active, improper, and intentional disruption of a, probable future profit.

Elements of the Claim (Washington Pattern Jury Instruction 352.03):
Valid Business Expectancy: A valid, existing, or potential economic relationship that would have likely produced a profit.
Knowledge: The defendant knew about this relationship.
Intentional Interference: The defendant intentionally acted to disrupt this relationship.
Improper Means/Purpose: The interference was wrongful, meaning it violated a statute, regulation, common law rule, or established trade standard, or was done with an intent to harm.
Damages: The plaintiff suffered actual economic harm proximately caused by the interference.

Key Aspects in Washington:
No Contract Needed: Unlike tortious interference with a contract, this applies to prospective relationships that have not yet resulted in a formal, binding contract.
Defenses: A common defense is that the defendant’s conduct was legitimate competition, provided they did not use unlawful or improper means.
Definition of "Improper": Washington courts often look to the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 767 to determine if interference was improper, balancing factors like the motive of the interferer and the interest of the other.