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 | 10 min read | 12.24.25
Since the signing of Executive Order 14187 (“Protecting Children from Chemical & Surgical Mutilation”) in late January 2025, the Trump Administration has made its skeptical stance on gender-affirming care—especially regarding services provided to minors—clear.
Client Alert | 3 min read | 12.24.25
Keeping it Real: FTC Targets Fake Reviews in First Consumer Review Rule
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.23.25
An ITAR-ly Critical Reminder of Cybersecurity Requirements: DOJ Settles with Swiss Automation, Inc.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 12.23.25
Record-Setting False Claims Act Settlement Highlights DOJ Commitment to Customs Enforcement
