to analogize its situation to that of the distributor in Otter Tail. 53 . In its opposition, GUA has accused Southern of possessing a natural monopoly since it was the only interstate pipeline capable of servicing industrial end users in the market area. 54 . To establish liability under the essential facilities doctrine, one must demonstrate (1) control of an essential facility by a monopolist; (2) a competitor's inability practically or reasonably to duplicate the essential facility; (3) the denial of the use of the facility to a competitor; (4) the feasibility of providing the facility. 55 . Southern makes this contention in a footnote on page 33 of its brief and in the December 6, 1989 reviously set forth. 61 . See Public Systems Inc. v. Towry, 587 So.2d 969, 973-974 (Ala.1991) (<HOLDING>) 62 . Alagasco stated that it would be unfair
holding that the difference between interference with contract and prospective relations is that second tort requires showing of malice recognizing the tort of interference with prospective contractual relations as a subspecies of the broader tort of interference with prospective economic advantage holding that contacting a competitors customers docs not constitute interference with business relations holding that sovereign immunity applies to claims alleging tortious interference with business relations because the tort requires proof of malice recognizing the tort of wrongful interference with anothers business relations