# Chaves v. Johnson

> Supreme Court of Virginia · September 6, 1985 · 230 Va. 112

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9848890

## Case

- **Full name:** Juan O. Chaves v. H. C. Johnson, Jr.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Virginia
- **Decided:** September 6, 1985
- **Citations:** 230 Va. 112; 335 S.E.2d 97; 1985 Va. LEXIS 258
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Compton
- **Judges:** Russell, Compton
- **Cited by:** 269 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9848890

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that statements that an architect was “inexperienced” and his fees were “excessive” are mere statements of opinion and do not impute unfitness to perform the duties of his employment
- holding that a defendant’s stating that professional fees were excessive depended upon the speaker’s viewpoint, which made the comment one of opinion
- stating that “[p]ure expressions of opinion, not amounting to ‘fighting words,’ cannot form the basis of an action for defamation”
- holding that “the interferor’s knowledge of the business relationship and his intent to disturb it are requisite elements”
- concluding that tortious interference with contract claim was “an intentional wrong to the property right of another.”

## Opinion text

COMPTON, J.,
dissenting in part.
I would affirm the judgment below in all respects. In my opinion, the trial court correctly decided that Johnson is not liable for interference with the plaintiffs contract rights.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9848890. Public record. Not legal advice.