Opinion ID: 1620423
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Goolesbys' Other Counterclaims

Text: The Goolesbys' third argument is that the trial court erred by entering a judgment as a matter of law for Koch Farms on the Goolesbys' counterclaims alleging conversion, intentional interference with business relations, and conspiracy to commit conversion and to intentionally interfere with business relations. For the reasons that follow, we disagree.
Conversion is a wrongful exercise of dominion over the property of another. Ott v. Fox, 362 So.2d 836, 839 (Ala.1978). In this case, it is undisputed that Koch Farms owned the chickens; the Goolesbys claim only a right of possession, not title. Mere possession of a chattel . . . will give a right of action for any interference therewith, except as against the true owner . . . . § 6-5-261, Ala.Code 1975 (emphasis added). Koch Farms was the true owner of the chickens. Under the express provisions of § 6-5-261, the Goolesbys could not state a conversion claim and the trial court properly entered a judgment as a matter of law for Koch Farms on that counterclaim. [7]
The only business relationship at issue in this case is the Goolesbys' contractual relationship with Koch Farms. As a matter of law, Koch Farms cannot be liable for interfering with its own business relationship. Waddell & Reed, Inc. v. United Investors Life Ins. Co., 875 So.2d 1143, 1154 (Ala.2003)(Clearly, a party to a contract or a business relationship cannot be liable for tortious interference with that contract or business relationship.). The Goolesbys argue that they presented evidence indicating that Ted New and Koch Foods, LLC, interfered with their business relationship with Koch Farms. However, the trial court has dismissed those parties from the action, and the Goolesbys did not appeal the dismissal. This issue is therefore moot.
A civil conspiracy cannot exist in the absence of an underlying tort. Avis Rent a Car Sys., Inc. v. Heilman, 876 So.2d 1111, 1124 (Ala.2003). Because the Goolesbys' counterclaims of conversion and intentional interference with business relations fail, the same is true of their counterclaim alleging that Koch Farms conspired to commit those torts.