The moving defendant sought summary judgment dismissing claims for breach of contract, misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment arising from negotiations for the purchase of a steam turbine generator for a co‑generation project.
The plaintiffs alleged that a binding contract arose from a purchase order and letter of intent and that the moving defendant participated in the negotiations and misrepresented issues affecting the project.
The moving party argued no contract was ever concluded and that any dealings were solely with a related corporate entity.
Applying the principles from Hryniak v. Mauldin, the court held that genuine issues requiring a trial existed, including the role of the moving defendant in negotiations, whether contractual relations were formed, and whether misrepresentations or unjust enrichment occurred.
Given the complex factual matrix and credibility issues, summary judgment was inappropriate.
