Cited by

The duty has been implied to all contracts, as a matter of law, ¶ 15 (App. 2006), and the duty may even be violated “without breaching an express provision of the underlying contract,” id.; see also Beaudry v. Ins.

¶ 26 (App. 2006); Ariz. R. Civ.

Wells Fargo Bank, 201 Ariz. at 491, ¶ 64; (noting that the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing can be breached in the absence of a breach of express covenants in the contract); ¶ 15 (App. 2006) (“A party can breach the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing without breaching an express provision of the underlying contract.”).

v. Johnson Bank, ¶ 22 (2016) (elements of contract claim include “resulting damages”) ¶ 21 (App. 2006) (reversed jury’s award for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing based on lack of proof of damages); see also Elyousef, 245 P.3d at 549–50 (applying the related doctrine of issue preclusion to damage issue litigated in a prior suit for the same injury); Bodam v. City of C

and the same is true for damages for breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing, ¶ 15 (App. 2006).

¶ 16 (App. 2006) (“Express contract provisions governing remedies or damages are generally binding on the parties.”).

(“Contractual discretion must be exercised reasonably and not arbitrarily or capriciously.”); – 41, ¶ 32 (App. 2006) (“Absent an abuse of discretion, business judgments will be respected by the courts.”).

¶ 31 (App. 2006) (citation omitted).

Summary judgment is appropriate “if the evidence presented by the party opposing the motion contains so little probative value, given the required burden of proof, that reasonable people could not agree with that party’s conclusions.” ¶ 26 (App. 2006) (citing Orme Sch.

138 ¶ 16, (“The right to recover liquidated damages is limited by the express terms of the parties’ agreement.”); 11 Joseph M. Perillo, Corbin on Contracts § 58.11 at 457 (rev. ed. 2005) (“The probable injury that the parties had reason to foresee is a fact that largely determines the q