Avatar Development Corp. v. De Pani Const., Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that defendant’s ulterior motive for termination had no relevance where contract permitted termination at any time
• noting that “[a]ll terms in the Master Contract and addenda can co-exist without conflict; therefore, there is no need to elevate one provision over another”
• “[T]he covenant of good faith cannot be used to create a breach of contract on [one party’s] part where there was no breach of any express term of the contract.”
• “Avatar’s ulterior motive for De Pani’s termination has no relevance[,] as Article 67 of the Master Contract provided Avatar with the right to terminate De Pani at any time. Florida law required nothing more of Avatar.” (internal citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).