Singh v. City of New York (2023)

 Case Analysis:

Implied Covenant of Good Faith in Business Contracts Introduction The New York Court of Appeals recently ruled on a significant business law case, Singh v. City of New York (2023), which holds important lessons for contract law, particularly regarding the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. This decision highlights the limitations of this covenant when clear contractual disclaimers are in place. Overview of the Case The case revolved around the claim by taxi medallion owners that New York City devalued their medallions by allowing ride-sharing services like Uber and Lyft to operate without stringent regulation. Plaintiffs argued that this undermined the implicit guarantee of good faith and fair dealing tied to the original contracts for medallion purchases. However, the Court ruled against the plaintiffs, citing that the bid forms the medallion owners signed contained disclaimers, expressly stating that the city made no warranties about the medallions’ future value. These disclaimers negated any implied promises of maintaining medallion value post-purchase. Key Takeaways for Business Owners • Implied Covenant of Good Faith: While New York law generally implies a covenant of good faith and fair dealing in contracts, it cannot override explicit disclaimers within an agreement. • Contractual Disclaimers Matter: Business contracts should be carefully reviewed for disclaimers, especially when dealing with government entities or public assets like medallions