Opinion ID: 2229677
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: conspiracy to terminate employment and breach the employment contract.

Text: Nelson asserts there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether the individual defendants conspired to terminate Nelson and breach his employment contract. This court has previously affirmed a directed verdict for defendants in an action alleging conspiracy to expel the plaintiff from his business. Time Out, Inc. v. Karras, 469 N.W.2d 380, 385 (S.D.1991). In Time Out, we found the discussion between the alleged conspirators evidenced little more than common business sense. Here, discussion during the election about changing management at WEB was similara discussion about business, not a conspiracy. Once the WEB Board was constituted, the actions of the individuals became the action of the whole, of the corporate entity. [T]here is no conspiracy if the conspiratorial conduct challenged is essentially a single act by a single corporation acting exclusively through its own directors, officers and employees, each acting within the scope of his [or her] employment. Herrmann v. Moore, 576 F.2d 453, 459 (2nd Cir.1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1003, 99 S.Ct. 613, 58 L.Ed.2d 679 (1978) (holding that the vote of faculty and trustees discharging professor was essentially a single act by corporation). We agree with the reasoning of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and find that the WEB Board could not commit conspiracy when acting as a corporate entity. The trial court's grant of summary judgment is affirmed on the issue of conspiracy.