Court Opinion

ID: 9462782
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 22:50:21.827662+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:37:47.289540
License: Public Domain

SKOPIL, District Judge
(dissenting):
I must respectfully dissent.
The existence of a contractual relationship is crucial to plaintiff’s federal cause of action. As the majority recognizes, its decision is correct only if the 1968 exchange contract was still executory when the alleged fraud occurred. Clearly, an express agreement by Verit to remove the stock transfer restrictions would have rendered *855the contract executory. But the contract contained no such agreement. The express terms of the contract had already been fully performed when the alleged fraud occurred. Even acknowledging that every contract contains an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, I do not believe that any implied duty sufficient to make the contract executory exists under the facts of this case.
I would affirm the decision of the district court.