I wonder if hes been committing TI on company time or company computers
Oh my, now this is a FASCINATING question. It never really occurred too me, but now that you brought it up.
Let's talk about Agent-Principle relationships, and how liability can attach to the principle as a result of the actions of an agent.
Under US law, we have established precedent dating back to middle ages England involving the master-servant relationship. See, back in ye Olden Tymes, it was accepted as a matter of course a Servant acted on the will of their Master. If a Servant were to say, engage in contract with a merchant to supply his master with a case of wine, the Master could not, when the merchant had bought the wine and brought it to the manor, claim he had ordered no such thing.
Common law precedents held that because the Servant of the Master said the wine would be bought, the Master had to buy the wine. Even if he didn't want too.
The US courts have extended this concept to civil torts. Basically, if an employee, through their official duties or through company means, holds themselves out as representing the company in the furtherance of a civil tort, the employee is not the only person made liable. The company itself is too.
Who is Elliot a senior manager of again? Is he using his position in that company to commit textbook tort Interference? Elliot may not have a couple million dollars to justify a lawsuit. But his employer might.