From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ward v. Krause

Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Danbury
Sep 9, 1998
1998 Ct. Sup. 10474 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1998)

Opinion

No. 32 87 80

September 9, 1998


MEMORANDUM OF DECISION CT Page 10475


This proceeding is a collection action brought upon a demand note. The defendant has filed an answer and five special defenses, the fifth of which asserts that the demand for payment violates the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The plaintiff has filed a motion to strike that special defense on the ground that the duty of good faith does not apply to a lender's decision to collect the amount due on a demand note.

"An implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is [e]ssentially . . . a rule of construction designed to fulfill the reasonable expectations of the contracting parties as they presumably intended. The principle, therefore, cannot be applied to achieve a result contrary to the clearly expressed terms of a contract, unless, possibly, those terms are contrary to public policy." (Emphasis in original; internal quotation marks omitted.) Eis v. Meyer, 213 Conn. 29, 36-37 (1989). A demand note, by its very nature, is payable immediately without demand. Savings Bank of New Britain v. Weed, 121 Conn. 414, 419-20 (1936). The application of a duty of good faith to the present case would, therefore, achieve a result contrary to the clearly expressed terms of the demand note. Accordingly, the plaintiff's motion to strike the defendant's fifth special defense is granted.

Moraghan, J


Summaries of

Ward v. Krause

Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Danbury
Sep 9, 1998
1998 Ct. Sup. 10474 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1998)
Case details for

Ward v. Krause

Case Details

Full title:LINDA WARD v. HEATHER ELIZABETH KRAUSE

Court:Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Danbury

Date published: Sep 9, 1998

Citations

1998 Ct. Sup. 10474 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1998)
23 CLR 140