Kendell Seafood Imports Inc. alleged that Mark Foods LLC interfered with its agreement to purchase the entire 2021 catch of Chilean sea bass from distributor Chilean Sea Bass Inc. Both companies import fish, and Kendell claimed that between 2012 and 2020 it had purchased CSB's entire catch each year. Kendell said Mark Foods solicited CSB's business despite knowing about Kendell's ongoing relationship with the distributor.
The First Circuit found that Kendell's amended complaint lacked sufficient factual allegations to establish the knowledge element of tortious interference under Rhode Island law. Circuit Judge Montecalvo wrote that the only factual allegations were that Mark Foods "attempted to procure CSB's annual catch by ... send[ing] [CSB] proposed purchase prices and requests to purchase" between 2012 and 2020. The court said these allegations "at most, they imply that Mark Foods knew it had lost out on CSB's catch to one or more unknown competitors in past years and hoped to fare better in competing for that catch."
Kendell initially filed its complaint in October 2024 alleging tortious interference, then filed an amended complaint in December 2024 after Mark Foods moved to dismiss. The Rhode Island federal district court granted the motion to dismiss with prejudice, finding that three elements of the tortious interference claim lacked facial plausibility. Kendell appealed the dismissal.
The decision reinforces that companies must provide specific factual allegations rather than conclusory statements to survive motions to dismiss in tortious interference cases. Under Rhode Island law, plaintiffs must show the defendant had actual knowledge of the specific contract allegedly interfered with, not just awareness of general business relationships in the industry.