In a decision dated July 8, 2009, Justice Driscoll denied Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment which sought damages on Defendant’s alleged failure to repay under a promissory note in connection with a loan allegedly conditioned on the sale of Defendants’ dental practice, finding that the language in the promissory note regarding the date of repayment on the loan was ambiguous and that an issue of fact therefore existed as to whether Defendants were in breach of the promissory note.