Case Title: Goldman v. Town of Plainfield

Citation: 171 Vt. 575, 762 A.2d 854

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 2000-10-17T00:00:00Z

Document:
Goldman v. Town of Plainfield (98-560); 171 Vt. 575; 762 A.2d 854 

[Filed 17-Oct-2000]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                       SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 98-560

                               MAY TERM, 2000

Alan B. Goldman and	               }	APPEALED FROM:
ABG Corporation	                       }
                                       }
     v.	                               }	Washington Superior Court
                                       }	
                                       }
Town of Plainfield	               }	DOCKET NO.  120-3-95 Wncv

Trial Judge: Matthew I. Katz 

             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       Plaintiffs Alan Goldman and ABG Corporation appeal from the dismissal
  of their complaint  upon defendant Town of Plainfield's motion for summary
  judgment.  On appeal, plaintiffs claim the  trial court erred in (1)
  concluding as a matter of law that misrepresentations by the Town made in
  the  course of contract negotiations were not material, and (2) in failing
  to properly apply the rational  basis test to their claim of unjust
  discrimination.  We affirm.

       This Court reviews a motion for summary judgment using the same
  standard as the trial court.  Summary judgment is appropriate only when the
  moving party has demonstrated that there are no  genuine issues of material
  fact and it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.  See O'Donnell v. 
  Bank of Vermont, 166 Vt. 221, 224,