Helo

Helo v. Equilon Enterprises, LLC

Good Law
126 F. App'x 859
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 6, 2005No. 03-56489; D.C. No. CV-03-02022-PACalifornia227 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Appellants, Géorge and Ned Helo (the Helos), appeal the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Appellees, Equilon Enterprises, LLC (Equilon). The Helos allege that Equilon breached a contract for the sale of real property when Equilon refused to approve assignment of an indemnity provision. The Helos contend the refusal violated the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing under California law. The implied covenant, however, is to assure compliance with the express terms of the contract. It should not create obligations beyond those contemplated in the contract. Racine & Laramie, Ltd. v. Cal. Dep’t of Parks & Recreation, 11 Cal. App.4th 1026, 1032 , 14 Cal.Rptr.2d 335 (1992). Thus, “where the contract is unambiguous, the express language is to govern.” Third Story Music, Inc. v. Waits, 41 Cal.App.4th 798, 808 , 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 747 (1995) (quoting Gerdlund v. Elec. Dispensers Int’l, 190 Cal.App.3d 263, 277-78 , 235 Cal.Rptr. 279 (1987)).

Here, the contractual provision at issue stated that Equilon could withhold its consent to an assignment “for any reason *860 whatsoever.” Equilon stated reasons for its refusal to consent. The district court was correct…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.