WPC   a[>H,Ҡ(=]3pZQF62XgSR FzKVZU_ j=LbTˤ6nb3+R2Q'ƒԱ3JzU>4r 0< 0<@ 0n|UFUJ00z 0#$UN %3 M9 (= Ne ^ g ws 4w  m \  `&Times New Roman'  Training0Training .   <:Default Para<:Footnote Ref< :Endnote TextXXX7\  `.Times New Roman TURkIA`2WP TypographicSymbols#|x(rq$..       X X HP LaserJet 5M,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular Xz/ h.:i+00U  q!..       X X   _       XXXXXX_Semtek_ԀInternationalIncorporatedv.LockheedMartinCorporation,CaseNo.  97183023/CC3762,2003_MDBT_Ԁ8(August15,2003)(CircuitCourtforBaltimoreCity)(per  JudgeAlbertJ._Matricciani_,Jr.) | DefendantLockheedMartinmovedforsummaryjudgmentonthetworemainingcountsofthe . ~ complaint:inducementofbreachofcontract(CountI);andintentionalinterferencewith  d prospectiveeconomicadvantage(CountyII).Defendantmovedforsummaryjudgmentbased  J on:therunningofthestatuteoflimitations;itsconductwasnotaproximatecauseofanybreach  0 andwasnotwrongful;abindingcontractdidnotexist;_Semtek_Ԁcouldnotproveareasonable    expectancyoffinancialbenefit;and_Semtek_XQXXX=XXXXQsdamagetheorywassospeculativeandthefacts    weresouniquethat_Semtek_Ԁshouldbebarredfromseekingdamages.   Held:PartialsummarygrantedastoCountIofthecomplaint.Inallotherrespects,themotion `  forsummaryjudgmentwasdenied. F  _Synposis_:Thefactsweretoodisparatetoadmittoanyonesetofundisputedfactsontheissueof b limitations.SummaryjudgmentaccordinglywasdeniedastoCountI.Therewerematerial H factsindisputewithrespecttocausationandareasonablefactfindercouldconcludethatajoint . ventureorpartnershipexistedbetweenLockheedand_Transworld_.Withrespecttotheclaimin  CountIofinducingabreachofcontract,partialsummaryjudgmentwasgrantedbecausethe  CourtXQXXX=XXXXQsreviewoftheletterofintent,protocolandbusinessagreementdemonstratedthatthose  documentslackedthedefiniteness,clarityandessentialtermsnecessarytoconstituteabinding x contract.WithrespecttoLockheedXQXXX=XXXXQsclaimthat_Semtek_Ԁcouldnotproveareasonableexpectancy ^ offinancialbenefit,thecourtappliedMassachusettslawtodenythemotionrulingthat F MassachusettslawonlyrequiredproofofaXQXXX_AXXXXQprobable_Ԁfuturebusinessrelationshipanticipatinga ,| reasonableexpectancyoffinancialbenefit.XQXXX@XXXXQԀWithrespecttoLockheedXQXXX=XXXXQsclaimthat_Semtek_XQXXX=XXXXQs d claimfordamageswastoospeculative,thecourtdeterminedthatitwasnotpreparedtogrant L summaryjudgmentonthatissueatthattime,butitcontinuedtoharborconcernsastowhethera 2 sufficientfoundationwouldbeestablishedfortheclaimstobesubmittedtothejury.   @ B.p` hp x (#XBCounsel: ` JackD._Lebowitz_,Esq.     p VadimA._Mzhen_,Esq.    @AndrewW._Zepeda_,Esq.     p LeslieN._Reizes_,Esq. z!  FrancisB.Burch,Jr.,Esq.     p AnthonyL.Meagher,Esq. `"! Brett_Ingerman_,Esq. h      p RobertE._Willett_,Esq. F#"   E.` hp x (#pX(#ERichardW._Buckner_,Esq.     p JessB.Frost,Esq. ,$|#   E.p` hp x (#X(#EThomasV._Girardi_,Esq.     p WalterK.Lack,Esq. %b $   E.` hp x (#pX(#EStevenC._Shuman_,Esq. %H!%  &."&  Relatedcases:2003_MDBT_Ԁ4,2003_MDBT_Ԁ5,_Semtek_ԀInternationalv.Lockheed,No.1930 '#' (SeptemberTerm2003)(CourtofSpecialAppeals).