Whether or not Bennett was correct in his allegation and whether or not his former employer was justified in its act were the questions presented to the court in the case of William Bennett v. Storz Broadcasting Company. The answers to these questions turned on the court's interpretation of the following issues: what acts constitute actionable interference; was the contract of employment between the plaintiff and the defendant, and/or the negative covenant contained therein, valid; was the existence of a contract crucial or even necessary for an action to lie; could there be any justification for the defendant's acts; and lastly, could the court award a summary judgment in such a case or must the case be decided on its facts as determined by a jury? These questions and their answers also constitute the basic issues of this topic-interference by a previous employer.
Robert I. Bendis, Contract Interference by Previous Employer, 17 Clev.-Marshall L. Rev. 181 (1968)