The state trial court granted Matrix's motion for summary judgment, concluding that the contract was unambiguous, imposing "no obligation on Matrix to provide any specific quantity of service, measured in hours, as consideration for its fee" and rejecting the DOC's position that FTE meant 40 hours a week. The DOC appealed.
The Supreme Court of Vermont held that it could not determine as a matter of law whether the contract intended that Matrix perform a specific level of services for its monthly fee, what FTE meant or how the contract's penalty provisions were to apply as these were subject to multiple reasonable interpretations. Therefore, summary judgment on the issues was inappropriate. The summary judgment was reversed and the case returned to the trial court for additional proceedings. See: Department of Corrections v. Matrix Health Systems, PC, 2008 VT 32.
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
Department of Corrections v. Matrix Health Systems, P.C.
|Cite||2008 VT 32|
|Level||State Supreme Court|