JSA Depot v. Foreverlawn CA4/3

FACTS

Prior Proceedings, Including JSA Depot I and JSA Depot II In December 2005, defendant and JSA entered into a contract whereby defendant granted JSA an exclusive license to sell defendant’s artificial turf in several counties in California and Nevada. (JSA Depot I, supra, G044164.) Plaintiffs sought

1 Because we reverse the judgment, we do not address plaintiffs’ alternative argument that the court erred by denying JSA’s motion for a new trial after the court granted defendant’s summary judgment motion.

2 damages at trial pursuant to several causes of action, including breach of contract and of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and interference with contract/prospective economic relations. (Ibid.) The jury found defendant liable to JSA and FSC in the combined amount (after a posttrial elimination of duplicative damages by the trial court) of $987,000. (Ibid.) Defendant appealed. In JSA Depot I, supra, G044164, we noted that defendant “does not dispute it breached the express and implied terms of its contract with JSA, interfered with JSA’s contracts with its subdealers, and interfered with FSC’s potential economic relations.” (Ibid.) But we concluded…