Tortious interference with a prospective business advantage does not require the existence of a contract.
(1) the existence of a valid business relationship or expectancy;
(2) Defendant was aware of this relationship or expectancy;
(3) that defendant intentionally interfered;
(4) that the motive behind the interference was improper;
(5) causation; and
(6) special damages.
Monumental Life Ins. Co. v. Nationwide Retirement Solutions, Inc., 242 F.Supp.2d 438, 450 (W.D.Ky. 2003). This analysis turns primarily on motive. National Collegiate Athletic Ass’n By and Through Bellarmine College v. Hornung, 754 S.W.2d 855, 859 (Ky. 1988). To prevail under this theory of liability, the “party seeking recovery must show malice or some significantly wrongful conduct.” Id.