Torts – conversion – damages — tortious interference with contract

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Civil

Torts – conversion – damages — tortious interference with contract

This appeal arises out of a failed restaurant deal.

George Roupas and George Barkoulis entered into a partnership with Konstantinos Bouras for the remodeling and operation of a restaurant in Stevens Point. The building in which the restaurant was located was owned by David and Barbara Zagrzebski. Barkoulis entered into a lease agreement with the Zagrzebskis for the restaurant. Bouras and Roupas were investors in the enterprise.

At some point, the relationship between Barkoulis and Roupas turned sour and a dispute between Barkoulis and the Zagrzebskis prompted the Zagrzebskis to lock Barkoulis out of the building. Several claims, counterclaims, and cross-claims were filed. For purposes of this appeal, the following three claims matter: 1) Roupas’s claim for conversion against the Zagrzebskis alleging that the Zagrzebskis obtained restaurant equipment owned by Roupas when they took control of the building by changing the locks (the conversion claim);

Barkoulis’s breach of lease claim against the Zagrzebskis alleging that the Zagrzebskis breached the lease by not making certain repairs to the premises, including not repaving the restaurant parking lot (the breach of lease claim); and 3) Barkoulis’s tortious interference claim against the Zagrzebskis alleging that the Zagrzebskis interfered with an agreement between Barkoulis and Roupas by conspiring with Roupas to “squeeze” Barkoulis out of the restaurant and replace him with Roupas (the tortious interference claim).

As to each of these claims, the jury found against the Zagrzebskis and awarded damages. And, as to each, the Zagrzebskis filed post-trial challenges in the trial court. ¶3 In response to the Zagrzebskis’ motions, the trial court granted relief as follows. As to the conversion claim, the trial court changed the jury’s verdict answers, including reducing the damages to zero. As to the breach of lease claim, the trial court reduced the damages for lost profits to zero. Finally, as to the tortious interference claim, the trial court granted the Zagrzebskis a new trial. Roupas and Barkoulis appeal. As explained below, we reverse with respect to the conversion claim, but affirm in all other respects. Not recommended for publication in the official reports.

2010AP968 Roupas v. Barkoulis, et al.

Dist IV, Portage County, Flugaur, J., Higginbotham, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Klein, James M., Stevens Point; For Respondent: Rushevics, Maris, Stevens Point