A breach of contract is not “wrongful conduct” sufficient to support a claim for interference with prospective economic relationships. Here, plaintiff narrowed its claim to interference based on the defendant’s breach of a nondisclosure agreement. Held, the trial court erred in submitting that claim to the jury since it was the court’s responsibility to determine whether the alleged conduct was “wrongful” sufficient to support the interference claim. Furthermore, the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to award relief on a claim (whether statutory or common law) where it was undisputed that a crucial element was missing. So the defendant didn’t waive the error by failing to object prior to entry of judgment in the plaintiff’s favor. Its JNOV motion sufficiently raised the point. Accordingly, the judgment was reversed with direction to enter judgment for defendant. The attorney fee award to plaintiff was also reversed.