A. John Cohen Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Middlesex Ins. Co., 8 Mass.App.Ct. 178, 392 N.E.2d 862, 864 (1979). As plaintiff points out, it simply did not allow a purported transfer of an already validly terminated franchise agreement. Plaintiff was certainly within its rights to refuse to allow the transfer in May 1998, after defendants themselves had materially breached the agreement and after the agreement itself had been terminated. Accordingly, this Court will grant plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on Counterclaim V alleging breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. C. Plaintiffs request for an order enforcing the termination of the parties’ franchise agreement shall be granted. As an additional remedy, plaintiff requests an ord 3-84 (E.D.N.Y.1990) (<HOLDING>). Furthermore, defendants clearly have
holding that because a valid arbitration clause existed the parties had to arbitrate all disputes when the subject matter of the dispute has a reasonable relationship to the subject matter of the contract holding that where the language of the contract is unambiguous and conveys a definite meaning the court may decide the meaning of the contract as a matter of law holding that for a suit to be brought in the venue in which the contract was to be performed the contract must expressly state where the performance of the contract was to occur holding contract unenforceable because rate of interest was of the essence and not detail to be supplied by court holding that franchisees scheme to underreport went to the root of the matter or the essence of the contract