3Moreover, the Court finds that many of Defendant’s statements are defamatory
,and therefore, special damages are presumed,
but in any event, Mr. Klein provided testimonysupporting special damages.
See Army Aviation Heritage Foundation and Museum, Inc. v. Buis
,504 F. Supp. 2d 1254, 1259 (N.D. Fla. 2007) (a false publication that “deters third persons fromdealing with [plaintiff corporation], assails its management, or impugns its method of doingbusiness is actionable per se,” and plaintiff therefore need not show damages) (citing
McIver v.Tallahassee Democrat, Inc.
, 489 So. 2d 793, 794 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986));
Scott v. Busch
, 907 So.2d 662, 667 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (“A statement that a person has committed a crime or donesomething illegal is one of the classic slander per se categories — that is, the pleader need notallege specific damages to state a cause of action.”). Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiffsare substantially likely to satisfy the elements for defamation and injurious falsehood.The elements of a cause of action for tortious interference with advantageous businessrelationships are: “(1) the existence of a business relationship [or prospective businessrelationship] under which the plaintiff has legal rights, (2) an intentional and unjustifiedinterference with that relationship by the defendant, and (3) damage to the plaintiff as a result of the breach of the business relationship.”
Zimmerman v. D.C.A. at Welleby, Inc.
, 505 So. 2d 1371,1373 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987) (affirming in part temporary injunction for defamatory statementsuttered incident to tortious interference with advantageous business relationships) (quoting
Symon v. J. Rolfe Davis, Inc.
, 245 So. 2d 278, 280 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)).Here, Comvest and FMI have presented sufficient evidence that (1) they have prospectivebusiness relationships with potential customers (in the case of FMI) and investors (in the case of Comvest); and (2) Defendant interfered with those relationships, intentionally and without
For example, the Defendant has stated that Plaintiffs operate a fraudulent enterprise, distributeunregistered guns, fund racist hate groups, have committed assault, and shoot up state property.