1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Breach Of Good Faith Doesn't Require Malice

Breach Of Good Faith Doesn't Require Malice

Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.03.06

The Court of Federal Claims in the unusual factual situation of Agredano v. U.S. (Mar. 27, 2006) took the opportunity to reinforce the growing body of decisional law that a party does not have to show subjective malice or intent to injure by a government employee to be able to recover for breach of good faith and fair dealing duties. In this case, Mexican nationals who bought a car seized by the Customs Service at a forfeiture sale "as is" and were then locked up for a year in Mexico when it was discovered at a traffic checkpoint that the upholstery was stuffed with marijuana stated a valid claim for breach of good faith duties to search the car and make sure it was "legal" before offering it for sale.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 07.17.26

U.S. Supreme Court Will Consider Challenge to Contempt Order in Federal Antitrust and Unfair Competition Case

In the underlying litigation, Epic Games alleged that Apple violated antitrust and unfair competition laws by engaging in anti-steering behavior related to purchases on Apple’s in-app payment system. Apple received a percentage of payments made through this system, and Epic Games argued that Apple prohibited app developers from informing users about alternative payment options.  ...