Hobin v. Coldwell Banker Residential Affiliates, Inc. case brief
summary
744 A.2d 1134 (N.H. 2000)
CASE FACTS
The court dismissed claims brought by plaintiff, a franchise, against defendant related to defendant's placement of additional franchises in plaintiff's territory. The parties agreed the franchise agreement expressly allowed defendant to place additional franchises in plaintiff's area, but disagreed as to whether the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing limited the extent of its discretion to do so.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed dismissal of plaintiff's claims, finding plaintiff did not allege a breach of an implied term of the agreement, thus, plaintiff failed to state a claim for breach of contract.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.
744 A.2d 1134 (N.H. 2000)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiff appealed from the Superior
Court of Rockingham (New Hampshire), which dismissed plaintiff's
claims against defendant for breach of the implied covenant of good
faith and fair dealing, breach of contract, misrepresentation, and
violation of N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 358 (1995).CASE FACTS
The court dismissed claims brought by plaintiff, a franchise, against defendant related to defendant's placement of additional franchises in plaintiff's territory. The parties agreed the franchise agreement expressly allowed defendant to place additional franchises in plaintiff's area, but disagreed as to whether the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing limited the extent of its discretion to do so.
DISCUSSION
- The court dismissed the claims of breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of contract, misrepresentation, and violation of N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 358 (1995) for failure to state a claim.
- The court affirmed, finding plaintiff failed to allege breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, thus, plaintiff did not allege a breach of an implied term of the agreement.
- Therefore, plaintiff failed to state a claim for breach of contract.
- The court properly dismissed the § 358 claim.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed dismissal of plaintiff's claims, finding plaintiff did not allege a breach of an implied term of the agreement, thus, plaintiff failed to state a claim for breach of contract.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.
No comments:
Post a Comment