Plaintiff had an at-will contract with a non-party to develop a drug based on a certain active ingredient. Defendant Biogen reached its own deal with that non-party to settle patent disputes and to license the same active ingredient—requiring that the at-will contract with Plaintiff be terminated. Plaintiff sued Biogen in federal court for tortious interference with contract, arguing that Biogen’s agreement violated a California statute barring contract provisions that restrain any trade or profession. The Ninth Circuit certified the matter to the California Supreme Court. The California Supreme Court ruled in favor of Biogen, represented by GMSR partner Laurie Hepler who argued the case, and Ropes & Gray, D.C. Clearing up uncertainty in California law, the Court held that (1) To state a claim for tortious interference with an at-will contract, a plaintiff must plead and prove an independently wrongful act, beyond interfering with the contract itself; and (2) California’s statutory prohibition on contract provisions restraining trade—when applied to one business restraining another—is subject to the same rule of reason analysis prescribed by antitrust common law.
Supreme Court Opinion – View Document
© 2025 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
6420 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1100
Los Angeles, California 90048
p: (310) 859 7811 | f: (310) 276 5261
50 California Street, Suite 1500
San Francisco, CA 94111
p: (415) 315 1774
© 2025 Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland LLP.
All rights reserved. Disclaimer - Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
We welcome your inquiry. However, sending us an email does not create an attorney-client relationship. For that reason, you should not send us any kind of confidential information. Until we have agreed to represent you, we cannot be obligated to keep it confidential.