Mike McDevitt and Tessemae Case

The plaintiff in this case is Tessemae’s that is a Maryland limited liability selling marinades, salad dressings, meal kits and much more. Michael McDevitt, defendant, is a non-lawyer owner and CEO of defendants Tandem Legal Group limited liability company. It all began when Greg Vetter first met McDevitt through an employee of Howard Bank. In this case McDevitt persuaded Tessemae’s to hire him with the promise of using Tandem legal and business services. The main motive here was to serve as the point of contact between the two involved parties. There are several allegations Tessemae’s alleges McDevitt and claims to suffer loss and damage as a result and includes the following.

RICO. Tessemae’s arts a claim under the Racketeer influenced and corrupt organizations act against McDevitt and Tandem Group. This allegation requires a plaintiff to plead facts showing conduct, of an enterprise, through a pattern and of racketeering activity. As a result of this activity the plaintiff suffered multiple injuries.

Second one is common-law fraud. The plaintiff claims that Michael McDevitt and Fraud cases were reported. It’s s requirement under Rule 9(b) for the plaintiffs to plead claims of fraud with particularity. Such includes time, place, contents of false representations and much more. In this court there is sufficient proof of this allegation by the side of the plaintiff. In this case Tessemae’s identifies McDevitt as the person who made the misrepresentations via phone and the plaintiff was harmed since the defendant profited from such misrepresentations.

Next is civil conspiracy. Tessemae’s alleges a count of civil conspiracy against defendants McDevitt. There are some requirements for this allegations to be successful with some of them including unlawful or tortious act. The fact that this can’t stand on its own requires it being based on some underlying tortious action by the defendants. However the defendants in this case argue that the plaintiff has not pled facts that support its assertion of a civil conspiracy among the defendant. This therefore leads to a conclusion that the complaints contains a naked allegation.

Tortious interference. This allegations against Mike McDevitt Baltimore is raised that caused damage to the plaintiff. Some requirements here include the plaintiff to show that the defendant committed intentional and willful acts, calculated the cause of damage, there is actual damage and it was done with unlawful purpose. Its therefore required that the plaintiff show that the interference as through improper means that the law limits to defamation, intimidation and violence. Interference with business relationships need be proven here. In this case, Tessemae’s has failed to allege the existence of any prospective relationships that would have occurred in the absence of interference by the defendant.