Restatement 2d of Contracts § 328. See, e.g., Langel v. Betz, 250 N.Y. 159, 164 N.E. 890 (1928) (applying non-delegation presumption in interpreting assignment of a real estate contract); see also Hudson Eng'g Assocs., P.C. v. Ames Dev. Corp., 228 A.D.2d 477, 643 N.Y.S.2d 677 (1996) (same); Davey v. Nessan, 252 Mont. 397, 830 P.2d 92, 96 (1992) (same); but see DeVenney v. Hill, 918 So.2d 106 (Ala.2005) (applying delegation presumption); Kunzman v. Thorsen, 303 Or. 600, 740 P.2d 754, 759 (1987) (same); Coral Gables, Inc. v. Kleaveland, 220 Iowa 1280, 263 N.W. 339, 342–43 (1935) (same). The non-delegation presumption is merely a default rule of contract interpretation, and a clear expression of contrary intent by the parties to the assignment—the assignor and assignee—will control.
See, e.g., Langel v. Betz, 164 N.E. 890 (N.Y. 1928) (applying non-delegation presumption in interpreting assignment of a real estate contract); see also Hudson Eng'g Assocs., P.C. v. Ames Dev. Corp., 228 A.D.2d 477 (N.Y. App. 1996) (same).; Davey v. Nessan, 830 P.2d 92, 96 (Mont. 1992) (same); but see DeVenney v. Hill, 918 So. 2d 106 (Ala. 2005) (applying delegation presumption); Kunzman v. Thorsen, 740 P.2d 754, 759 (Or. 1987) (same); Coral Gables, Inc. v. Kleaveland, 263 N.W. 339, 342-43 (Iowa 1935) (same). The non-delegation presumption is merely a default rule of contract interpretation, and a clear expression of contrary intent by the parties to the assignment - the assignor and assignee - will control.
Thus, breach of an express contractual term is not a prerequisite to breach of the implied covenant.") This Court has expressly held that a contractual relationship is a prerequisite to an action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Davey v. Nessan (1992), 252 Mont. 397, 404, 830 P.2d 92, 96. ¶ 17 The gravamen of Solle's complaint is that she was terminated from her employment with WSIA in violation of WSIA's written policies and procedures.
Our function is to determine if the Workers' Compensation Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law are supported by substantial credible evidence in the record. We will uphold the Workers' Compensation Court's decision if substantial credible evidence supports it. Nelson v. Semitool, Inc. (1992), 252 Mont. 397, ___, 829 P.2d 1, 3. I.