“In this case, Roeslein has not submitted evidence proving that Wendt contracted a specific or specialized portion of its contract to Trillium, and there remains a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Trillium was a subcontractor of Wendt,” the court said. “As a result, summary judgment cannot be granted as to Roeslein’s claim that Wendt breached the contract by failing to require Trillium to be bound by the agreements.”
“In this case, Roeslein has not submitted evidence proving that Wendt contracted a specific or specialized portion of its contract to Trillium, and there remains a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Trillium was a subcontractor of Wendt,” the court said. “As a result, summary judgment cannot be granted as to Roeslein’s claim that Wendt breached the contract by failing to require Trillium to be bound by the agreements.”
