DABOSS, remember I'm no lawyer either bro'! LOL. Read Doc 326, pages 2 through 5, for a good explanation of digEcor's claim for breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. The Court entertained a partial summary judgment motion from EDIG in which EDIG asked the Court basically to throw out digEcor's claim that EDIG had breached the duty of good faith and fair dealing when they marketed the eVU while digEcor's order of digEplayer 5500's was delayed. EDIG filed that motion (Doc 331) on 7 Apr 09 and today the Court granted it. This claim by digEcor is now dead and digEcor lost huge...again. LOL

-----

Here is an excerpt from page 2 of Doc 326,

I. digEcor’s Claim for Breach of the Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Fails.

digEcor alleges that e.Digital violated the duty of good faith and fair dealing implicit in the PO [Purchase Order] by marketing the eVu while digEcor’s order for digEplayer 5500s was delayed. According to digEcor, e.Digital’s marketing efforts interfered with digEcor’s justified expectations to profit from selling the digEplayer 5500s it had ordered from e.Digital. e.Digital responds that accepting digEcor’s argument would write a covenant not to compete into the PO, a result not permitted under Utah law.

-----

And here is an excerpt from page 5 of Doc 326 in which digEcor asked the Court to rule on the issue before the trial but the Court denied their request. Then the judge told EDIG, "Hey, if you want to try and get digEcor's claim thrown out before trial, file a motion and I'll rule in your favor."

Accordingly, digEcor’s motion for summary judgment on its claim of breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing is DENIED. Because digEcor’s claim cannot prevail as a matter of law, the court will entertain a motion by e.Digital for summary judgement in its favor on the claim for breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing under the Third Claim of digEcor’s operative complaint.

EDIG owes digEcor ZERO dollars for this claim. Another one bites the dust!