in Dow-rick, referring to Restatement, supra, Section 762, said: “The rationale for this rule ‘rests upon fundamental assumptions in free business enterprise. Each business enterprise must be free to select its business relations in its own interest.’ Id., comment a. The Restatement also recognizes that the rule covers a situation involving a lender and borrower. Id., comment d.” Id., 144 Vt. at 512, 481 A.2d at 400-401. The Bank’s privilege to refuse to do business with plaintiffs existed regardless of the motive for its decision. The fact that the Bank may have denied consent because of the earlier lawsuit is immaterial. See Turner Constr. Co. v. Seaboard Sur. Co., 98 A.D.2d 88, 469 N.Y.S.2d 725 (1983); see also Posa, Inc. v. Miller Brewing Co., 642 F.Supp. 1198 (E.D.N.Y.1986) (<HOLDING>). Thus, the Bank was privileged to decide not
holding that woman has constitutionally protected right to determine for any reason or no reason to terminate her pregnancy holding that there is no right to a setoff against a lawfully imposed condominium charge holding that an atwill employee can be discharged for any reason or no reason unless employee is discharged for reasons that contravene a clear mandate of public policy holding that refusal to maintain trade relations is an inherent right that every person may exercise lawfully for reasons he deems sufficient or for no reason whatever holding that no person can commence or maintain an action in a court of record as agent for another unless he is a regularly licensed attorney