Plaintiff brought a claim against Alfa Vision Insurance Company for intentional interference with a contract or business expectancy claiming Alfa Vision provided coverage to the alleged tortfeasor when Alfa Vision knew or should have known the insurance application submitted by its insured contained false information. Plaintiff alleged that by providing coverage to the alleged tortfeasor Alfa Vision deprived Plaintiff from pursuing an uninsured motorist claim with his UM carrier, The Hartford. Alfa Vision argued that Plaintiff lacked standing to litigate whether there was coverage under the Alfa Vision auto policy because Plaintiff was neither a party to the Alfa Vision insurance contract nor a third-party beneficiary of the Alfa Vision insurance contract. Alfa Vision further argued that Plaintiff’s claim for intentional interference with a contract was premature because a condition precedent to either Alfa Vision or The Hartford performing on their respective insurance contracts would be a determination of liability on the part of the alleged tortfeasor. Alfa Vision also argued that Plaintiff failed to establish an absence of justification for Alfa Vision’s extension of coverage to the alleged tortfeasor and lastly that Plaintiff failed to show that Alfa Vision had any knowledge of Plaintiff’s contract with The Hartford at the time Alfa Vision extended coverage to the alleged tortfeasor. The Circuit Court of Oregon County, Missouri entered Summary Judgment in favor of Alfa Vision. John Mullen and Joan Sheridan represented Alfa Vision Insurance Company.