UNITED AIRLINES INC v. GOOD TASTE INC | FindLaw

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/ak-supreme-court/1459037.html
site-preview

Supreme Court of Alaska. UNITED AIRLINES, INC., Appellant and Cross- Appellee, v. GOOD TASTE, INC., d/b/a Saucy Sisters Catering, Appellee and ... Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select UNITED AIRLINES INC V. GOOD TASTE INC UNITED AIRLINES INC v. GOOD TASTE INC UNITED AIRLINES, INC., Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. GOOD TASTE, INC., d/b/a Saucy Sisters Catering, Appellee and Cross-Appellant. Before:  MATTHEWS, Chief Justice, COMPTON, EASTAUGH, FABE, and BRYNER, Justices. Lawrence S. Robbins and Monica C. Burke, Mayer, Brown & Platt, Washington, D.C., and Robert B. Baker, Baker, Brattain & Huguelet, Anchorage, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee. Jeffrey A. Friedman and Richard H. Friedman, Friedman, Rubin & White, Anchorage, and Richard E. Speidel, Northwestern School of Law, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant. United Airlines terminated a catering contract with Saucy Sisters Catering in Anchorage.   Saucy Sisters sued, claiming fraud, breach of contract, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.   The trial court dismissed the breach of contract claim but allowed the other claims to be tried.   A jury, finding no fraud but a breach of the implied covenant, awarded Saucy Sisters damages.   We hold that under Illinois law, which the parties agree governs, the contract could be terminated at will, and the implied covenant did not require United to have a legitimate business reason for termination.   We therefore remand for entry of judgment for United. The background facts are undisputed;  the trial court summarized them concisely as follows: In 1987, United contacted Saucy Sisters' President and invited her to bid on United's in-flight catering contract.   Shortly after United's invitation, Saucy Sisters entered into discussions/negotiations with United regarding the particulars of the catering contract and the obligations of the parties.   On March 14, 1988, United awarded Saucy Sisters the catering contract.   As a result of being awarded the contract, and in order to meet United's operation requirements for contracting caterers, Saucy Sisters expanded its operation extensively, spending roughly one million dollars in the process.  [Footnote omitted.]   A “Catering Agreement” (“Agreement”) was signed by the parties and was performed for approximately one year.   On May 18, 1989, United gave Saucy Sisters a ninety (90) day notice of termination by which it notified Saucy Sisters that its performance under the Agreement would terminate as of August 15, 1989.   The Agreement was terminated August 15, 1989.



GOOD TASTE Inc. (@goodtasteinc) • Instagram photos and videos

https://www.instagram.com/goodtasteinc/?hl=en
site-preview

87.6k Followers, 1615 Following, 541 Posts - See Instagram photos and videos from GOOD TASTE Inc. (@goodtasteinc) ABOUTHELPPRESSAPIJOBSPRIVACYTERMSLOCATIONSTOP ACCOUNTSHASHTAGSLANGUAGE © 2020 INSTAGRAM FROM FACEBOOK



United Airlines, Inc. v. Good Taste, Inc., 982 P.2d 1259 (1999): Case ...

https://www.quimbee.com/cases/united-airlines-inc-v-good-taste-inc
site-preview

A summary and case brief of United Airlines, Inc. v. Good Taste, Inc., 982 P.2d 1259 (1999), including the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, key ... You're using an unsupported browser. Quimbee might not work properly for you until you update your browser. From our private database of 16,300+ case briefs... United Airlines, Inc. v. Good Taste, Inc. Good Taste, Inc. (plaintiff) was a catering business that operated under the name Saucy Sisters Catering (SSC). United Airlines, Inc. (United) (defendant) invited SSC to submit a bid for a catering contract and ultimately awarded SSC the contract. In order to meet the obligations under the contract, SSC spent approximately $1 million to expand its operations. The contract contained a termination provision that allowed either party to terminate at any time with 90 days’ notice. United terminated the contract under this provision approximately one year into the three-year agreement. SSC sued United for breach of contract under the theory that United had breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The jury found in SSC’s favor and awarded damages for the breach. United appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court. Alert The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, please start your free trial or log in. Alert The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, please start your free trial or log in. Holding and Reasoning (Bryner, J.) Alert The holding and reasoning section includes: A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;






Buen Sabor – Probably The Best Empanadas Ever ***** We want to tantalize your taste buds, and give you a few extra moments to connect with friends and family. But we, like you, expect more from our food choices ...

https://buen-sabor.com/

We want to tantalize your taste buds, and give you a few extra moments to
connect with friends and family. But we, like you, expect more from our food
choices ...






Ads