context: (Countercl. PP 201, 227, 236.) Such allegations, without more, are inadequate.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that "plaintiffs' bare allegations of malice do not suffice, particularly where such allegations are contradicted by plaintiffs' own claims that defendants' actions were financially [motivated]"
citation_a.sentence: See Rather v. CBS Corp., 68 A.D.3d 49, 886 N.Y.S.2d 121, 128 (N.Y.App.Div., 1st Dep’t, 2009) (finding “bare allegations of malice” to be insufficient “to bring the [tortious interference] claim under an exception to the economic interest rule”); see also Ruha v. Guior, 277 A.D.2d 116, 717 N.Y.S.2d 35, 36 (N.Y.App. Div., 1st Dep’t, 2000) (holding that “plaintiffs’ bare allegations of malice do not suffice, particularly where such allegations are contradicted by plaintiffs’ own claims that defendants’ actions were financially [motivated]”).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 886 N.Y.S.2d 121, 128
citation_b.parenthetical: finding "bare allegations of malice" to be insufficient "to bring the [tortious interference] claim under an exception to the economic interest rule"
citation_b.sentence: See Rather v. CBS Corp., 68 A.D.3d 49, 886 N.Y.S.2d 121, 128 (N.Y.App.Div., 1st Dep’t, 2009) (finding “bare allegations of malice” to be insufficient “to bring the [tortious interference] claim under an exception to the economic interest rule”); see also Ruha v. Guior, 277 A.D.2d 116, 717 N.Y.S.2d 35, 36 (N.Y.App. Div., 1st Dep’t, 2000) (holding that “plaintiffs’ bare allegations of malice do not suffice, particularly where such allegations are contradicted by plaintiffs’ own claims that defendants’ actions were financially [motivated]”).