“A tortious breach of contract is a breach of contract coupled with ‘. . . independent tort.'” Robinson v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Co., 915 So.2d 516, 520 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005) (quoting Wilson v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 883 So.2d 56,66 (Miss. 2004)) (emphasis added). “In order to determine whether the corporation veil should be pierced, the corporation must first be assumed liable.”
Further, emphasizing the similarities between the elements of tortious breach of contract and those of a bad faith claim, Allstate underscores that “[t]here is no evidence that Allstate committed an intentional wrong or participated in some activity amounting to an ‘insult, abuse, or negligence so gross as to constitute an independent tort.'” Docket No. 95 at 14 (quoting Robinson v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Co., 915 So.2d 516, 520 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005) (internal citations omitted)).
[1-5]. The Complaint sufficiently notifies Allstate of a breach of contract cause of action, especially given breach of contract is a necessary element of tortious breach of contract. Robinson v. S. Farm Bureau Cas. Co., 915 So. 2d 516, 520 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005); see also Maness v. K & A Enters. of Miss., 250 So. 3d 402, 414 (Miss. 2018) (defining breach of contract as (1) the existence of a valid contract and (2) a breach of the contract).
To the extent Deloach seeks to recover for tortious breach of contract, that claim overlaps with her claims of negligence and gross negligence. See Robinson v. S. Farm Bureau Cas. Co., 915 So. 2d 516, 520 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005) ("A tortious breach of contract is a breach of contract coupled with 'some intentional wrong, insult, abuse, or negligence so gross as to constitute an independent tort.'") (quoting Wilson v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 883 So.2d 56, 66 (Miss. 2004)).
Tortious breach of contract requires, in addition to the breach, some intentional wrong, insult, abuse, or negligence so gross as to constitute an independent tort. Wilson v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 883 So. 2d 56 (Miss. 2004); Robinson v. S. Farm Bureau Cas. Co., 915 So. 2d 516, 520 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005). Plaintiff has not provided any evidence that Defendant engaged in behavior which rises to the level of an independent tort.
"A tortious breach of contract is a breach of contract coupled with 'some intentional wrong, insult, abuse, or negligence so gross as to constitute an independent tort.'"Robinson v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Co., 915 So. 2d 516, 520 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005) (emphasis added) (quoting Wilson v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 883 So. 2d 56, 66 (Miss. 2004)). In order "[t]o recover for tortious breach, a plaintiff must show that it is entitled to punitive damages, as the general rule for recovery under a tortious breach claim is the same as the general rule for recovery of punitive damages in a breach of contract action."
Because the handbook in this case provides for expulsion when a graduate student violates the academic honesty policy, the plaintiff is unable to show that MUW breached her contract at all — much less in a "tortious" manner, which requires "some intentional wrong, insult, abuse, or negligence so gross as to constitute an independent tort." Robinson v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Co., 915 So. 2d 516, 520 (Miss. App. 2005) (quoting Wilson v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 883 So. 2d 56, 66 (Miss. 2004)).
Tortious breach of contract requires, in addition to the breach, some intentional wrong, insult, abuse, or negligence so gross as to constitute an independent tort. Wilson v. Gen. Motors Accep. Corp, 883 So.2d 56 (Miss. 2004); Robinson v. Southern Farm Bur. Cas. Co., 915 So.2d 516, 520 (Miss.Ct.App. 2005). Where there has been no breach of contract, the plaintiff cannot recover for tortious breach.
Both the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the appellate courts of Mississippi have observed that the duty of good faith and fair dealing is not breached when the contract authorizes the precise action (or inaction) about which a party complains. See Grand Housing, Inc., 2005 WL 673267, at * 4 (finding no bad faith where defendant "at all times acted within its contractual authority"); Johnston v. Palmer, 963 So. 2d 586, 593-95 (Miss.Ct.App. 2007) (finding no breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing when defendant complied with contract terms drafted by plaintiff); Robinson v. S. Farm Bureau Cas. Co., 915 So. 2d 516, 520-21 (Miss.Ct.App. 2005) (affirming trial court's finding "that no triable issue of fact existed regarding the contract claims because there was no breach of contract"); Cothern v. Vickers, Inc., 759 So. 2d 1241, 1249 (Miss. 2000) (finding that even assuming a contract existed, defendant complied with contract and did not breach covenant of good faith and fair dealing).
The duty of good faith and fair dealing arises only from a contractual relationship. See Robinson v. Southern Farm Bureau Cas. Co., 915 So.2d 516, 520 (Miss.Ct.App. 2005). Lott does not allege the existence of any contract between herself and Ameriquest.