Witmer v. Exxon Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the duty of good faith did not define the franchisor’s power to terminate the franchise agreement where the contract “expressly reserve[d] to each party the right not to renew the lease agreement at the end of the lease term.” (emphasis added)
• finding that the implied duty of good faith is not breached when a franchisor does “no more than activate the procedures explicitly contemplated by the plain terms” of the contract
• a court cannot accelerate the date chosen by the legislature for a statute to become effective
• implied duty of good faith “serves the valuable purpose of defining contractual relationships which have been left unexpressed by the parties”
• “Unconscionability has generally been recognized to include [a procedural element] together with [a substantive element].” (citation omitted, emphasis supplied)
• \Unconscionability has generally been recognized to include [a procedural element] together with [a substantive element].\ (citation omitted, emphasis supplied)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).