Opinion ID: 59477
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Whether SBS's Intentional Acts Were The Proximate Cause Of Amigo's Damages

Text: To establish proximate cause, a party must show that the defendant took an active part in persuading a party to a contract to breach it. Davis v. HydPro, Inc., 839 S.W.2d 137, 139 (Tex.App.1992) (emphasis omitted). Merely entering into a contract with a party with the knowledge of that party's contractual obligations to someone else is not the same as inducing a breach. Id. Amigo presented sufficient evidence that SBS committed numerous acts of interference for the purpose of employing Garza and Bernal, as discussed in Section III.B.2 supra, and these acts were successful in persuading Garza and Bernal to leave Amigo. First, SBS knew the terms of Garza's and Bernal's contracts with Amigo and offered them higher salaries and bonuses. Second, Garza and Bernal knew of the SBS Employment Agreements and their terms before they left Amigo. Specifically, SBS transmitted final drafts of employment agreements to Hernandez on November 24, 2003, the day before Garza and Bernal stopped performing the Show, and revised those agreements on November 25, the day before Garza and Bernal definitively informed Amigo that it would no longer be performing the Show. Finally, Garza's and Bernal's statements to Amigo indicated that their decision to leave Amigo was directly due to SBS's offer of employment. Brooks testified that on November 26, Bernal informed him that he and Garza had accepted positions with SBS in Los Angeles, and Garza thereafter told him via phone that he did not need Amigo any more. Thus, Amigo produced sufficient evidence of proximate causation. See Top Value Enters., Inc., 703 S.W.2d at 811 (finding sufficient evidence of proximate causation where the defendant made an active presentation and topped the terms of plaintiffs previous contracts, resulting in a successful offer).