Opinion ID: 2630537
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Alaska's Breach of Contract and Promissory Estoppel Claims

Text: Alaska argues the superior court erred in dismissing its nonstatutory claims of breach of contract and promissory estoppel because Sebastiani owed it the common law duty of good faith and fair dealing. Br. of Appellant/Alaska at 35. Alaska contends Sebastiani violated this duty when it did not include Alaska's name on a list of TRV distributors it provided CWC as the purchaser of TRV. Br. of Appellant/Alaska at 35. To prevail on summary judgment, Alaska had to prove Sebastiani had a nonstatutory duty not to terminate Alaska's distribution of the TRV line, and no material issues of fact existed. CR 56(c). The superior court found that counsel were in agreement as to the scope of the oral agreement which existed between the parties. CP at 438. The agreement merely said Alaska would distribute all of Sebastiani wines in specific western Washington counties. There was no evidence that Sebastiani had agreed to produce any or all of its wines in perpetuity or not to reduce its production. CP at 438. The TRV line is but one line of wines Alaska distributed for Sebastiani, and Alaska conceded it continues to distribute other Sebastiani lines during the period of this litigation. The superior court concluded, [t]he TRV line of wines is no longer produced by Sebastiani and, therefore, by definition, Sebastiani has no duty or obligation to use Alaska as a distributor for products which it no longer produces. CP at 438. The superior court concluded Sebastiani, continues to fulfill the terms of its oral distribution contract with Alaska by continuing to use Alaska as a distributor of its other lines. Alaska argues that when a supplier has an exclusive distribution agreement of indefinite duration with a distributor, the supplier's right to terminate for any reason is not questioned; but its right to terminate at any time is limited by the giving of a reasonable notice. Mayflower Air-Conditioners, Inc. v. W. Coast Heating Supply, Inc., 54 Wash.2d 211, 215, 339 P.2d 89 (1959). Alaska here contends because Sebastiani gave no prior notice of its sale of the TRV line, it violated this duty. Br. of Appellant/Alaska at 35. We agree with the superior court that the oral contract for exclusive distribution of Sebastiani products by Alaska has not been breached. Sebastiani no longer produces the TRV line of wines and therefore cannot supply them to Alaska. Alaska does not contest the superior court's conclusion that it remains the exclusive distributor of the remaining Sebastiani lines in the designated regions. We therefore affirm the superior court's dismissal of this claim.