Appellant developer sought review of the order of the Superior Court of Riverside County (California), which granted appellee city and city manager's motion for dismissal with prejudice in an action brought by appellant under the Government Tort Claims Act, alleging breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and fraud and deceit.

California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. offers counsel for CRC 3.1200

Overview

Appellant developer entered into an oral contract with appellees, a city and its manager, whereby appellee would give appellant a parcel of land. Appellant filed an action after appellees failed to fully perform under the contract, alleging breaches of contract and implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and fraud and deceit. The trial court sustained appellees' demurrers on the grounds that the contract violated the statute of frauds and that no valid cause of action could have sounded as there was no valid contract, and the trial court dismissed appellant's claim with prejudice after appellant amended his complaint. On appeal, the court held that the trial court was legally correct in sustaining appellees' demurrer because appellant's exhibits showed that it did not have a contract with appellee city, but rather with another governmental entity, and the court held that absent a valid contract, there could have been no valid cause of action for breaches of contract and implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the trial court.

Outcome

The court affirmed the order of the trial court that granted appellee city and appellee city manager's motion for dismissal with prejudice. The court held that appellant developer did not have a valid contract with appellee city and that absent a valid contract, could not have asserted a valid cause of action for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.