We did not provide the complaint of Mary Slay, first filed in 9/2016, because Justice Cunningham summed her case ably and clearly in the delivery of the judgment of the three-justice panel of the Appellate Court.
The three justices reviewed whether the allegations of the second amended complaint stated a claim for breach of the EA Agreement, arising from a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. They came to the conclusion that Allstate had breached in this case the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and thus reversed and remanded the case back to the lower court. It indicates that the EA Agreement is not air-tight, as many agents made to believe, and it can be challenged. However, it must be pointed out that this judgment is made narrowly in view of the facts presented by Slay and cannot be applied broadly to refute the EA Agreement by referring to a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Below we outline the Slay case: