Vermont Supreme Court - 161 Vt. 200
In the 1993 case of Carmichael v. Adirondack Bottled Gas Corp., the Vermont Supreme Court heard a lawsuit filed by a widow, who had inherited a gas distributorship from her husband, against a gas supplier for breach of contract. The widow accused the supplier of violating an implied duty of good faith and fair dealing by trying to force her to sell the business at a low price, while the supplier claimed that the contract had automatically ended when the husband died based on a "key man" clause.
The trial court allowed a jury to determine the outcome, which favored the widow and awarded her damages. The gas supplier appealed. The court decided in favor of the widow, stating that the contract did not automatically terminate upon her husband's death and instead required both parties to act in good faith until the contract expired. They also found that Vermont law includes an implied duty of good faith and fair dealing in all contracts, which means each party must not interfere with the other's rights under the agreement.
The court concluded that the gas supplier had broken this implied duty by trying to force the widow to sell at an unfair price, refusing to supply gas, and interfering with her customer relations. The jury's award of additional damages was justified by the supplier's malicious behavior.
This case is significant because it demonstrates how courts use state law and contract principles to interpret contracts, considering implied obligations and other factors. It emphasizes the importance of good faith and fair dealing in commercial deals and shows how courts balance justice and fairness with the autonomy and discretion of involved parties.
The defendant in a breach of contract case appealed a $160,000 award to the plaintiffs for violating an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The defendant claimed that the plaintiffs' claims were already resolved in arbitration or in a federal antitrust case, that the trial court should have directed a verdict in their favor, that the court erroneously instructed the jury on the law of breach of good faith, that the plaintiffs waived their claim for punitive damages, that the court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the defense of accord and satisfaction, and that the award and calculation of interest in the judgment order were erroneous. However, the court affirmed the decision. The case involved a "key man" clause in a business agreement between the Carmichaels and Adirondack Bottled Gas Corp. After Philip Carmichael's death triggered the "key man" termination provision, Adirondack breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by not communicating to Carmichael that she needed to sign a new contract and instead sent a letter offering to purchase the business. Adirondack threatened to cut off Carmichael's fuel supply if she declined their offer to purchase her business. The parties had several claims against each other regarding deposits, payments, accounts receivable, inventory, and fuel supply, which were submitted to arbitration. The arbitration award resolved all disputes arising under the Contractor Agreement between the parties and included a monetary award to Carmichael. Carmichael filed a federal antitrust suit against Adirondack, resulting in a stay of the state court proceedings. After the federal court dismissed Carmichael's antitrust suit, Adirondack moved for summary judgment in state court, arguing that Carmichael's remaining complaints were barred by res judicata. The state court denied summary judgment, and the parties proceeded to trial. The trial court directed a verdict in Adirondack's favor on all but one count of Carmichael's complaint, which alleged a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The jury returned a verdict against Adirondack, awarding $60,000 compensatory and $100,000 punitive damages. Adirondack argued that the arbitration award and the dismissal of Carmichael's federal antitrust complaint precluded her state court action, but the Vermont Supreme Court found that there was no basis to give res judicata effect to the arbitration award. The court could not determine whether the arbitration award resolved all of the parties' claims against each other arising out of their business relationship.
LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.
Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.
Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.
Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.
DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.
Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.
Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.
Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.