Case Problem Analysis 17.1 Third Party Beneficiaries Third Party Beneticanes Emelyn Logan Baldwin and other owners Logan Baldwin contracted with LSM General Contractors, Inc. (LSM) to conduct renovations on the historic residence. LSM subcontracted with Henry Isaacs Home Remodeling and Repair saac) to perform the roofing work on the project. Isaacs turn subcontracted with Hal Brewster Home Improvements (Brewster to conduct the cooling work on behalf When Brewster performed work on the roof, he "botched the job and caused extensive leading inside the house.LSM and Issacs attempted to correct the problems, but eventually abandoned the project, leaving Logan-Baldwin to hire others to complete the renovations Logan Baldwin sued LSM. Isaac and Baldwin for breach of contract Isaacs sought to dismiss Logan-Baldwin's claim against arguing no peivity of contract existed between themselves and Logan-Baldwin, and therefore Isaacs should not be liable for any damages 1. The principle that one who is not a direct party to a particular contract normally does not have rights under that contract is known as 2. LSM Select theve privity of contract with Logan -Baldwin, while Isaacs Seine have pruty of contract with Logan Baldwm. 3. An exception to the doctrine of pelvity of contract arises when a contract is intended to benefit a thing 4. This case primarily deals with Pelect 5. Select is the promisor in this case 6. Sale is the promise 7. Select is the third party 8. A third party that is considered an intended beneficiary to a contract Select sue the promisor for breach of contract GO & + 3 4 ( 9 5 6 ) 0 7 8 E R Y U o LP se Problem Analysis 17.1: Third Party Beneficiaries 9. Athird party that is considered an incidental beneficiary to a contract we sue the promisor for breath of contract 10. in determining whether a beneficiary is an intended or incidental beneficiary, the presence of one or more of the following factors strongly indicates that the third party is an intended beneficiary to the contract whether performance is rendered Select 3 to the third party, if the third party has a right to saler 1), and if the third party is Suleet 11. Was Isaacs' performance directly to Logan Baldwin? Sect) 12. Did Logan-Baldwin have the right to control the details of Isaacs' performance? Sufact 13. Did Logan Baldwin expressly appear as a beneficiary in the contract? Select 14. Although a factor to be considered an intended beneficiary under the contract, the name "Logan-Baldwin" sauc 1 expressly appear in the terms of the contract 15. As a result of performance being rendered directly to Logan-Baldwin, and Logan-Baldwin's right to control the details of performance, Logan Baldwin will likely be considered an Select beneficiary 16. As an intended beneficiary, Logan Baldwin Select sue to enforce the contract, 12. Is it likely that the court would have ruled in favor of Logan-Baldwin? Select Case Problem Analysis 17.1 Third Party Beneficiaries Third Party Beneticanes Emelyn Logan Baldwin and other owners Logan Baldwin contracted with LSM General Contractors, Inc. (LSM) to conduct renovations on the historic residence. LSM subcontracted with Henry Isaacs Home Remodeling and Repair saac) to perform the roofing work on the project. Isaacs turn subcontracted with Hal Brewster Home Improvements (Brewster to conduct the cooling work on behalf When Brewster performed work on the roof, he "botched the job and caused extensive leading inside the house.LSM and Issacs attempted to correct the problems, but eventually abandoned the project, leaving Logan-Baldwin to hire others to complete the renovations Logan Baldwin sued LSM. Isaac and Baldwin for breach of contract Isaacs sought to dismiss Logan-Baldwin's claim against arguing no peivity of contract existed between themselves and Logan-Baldwin, and therefore Isaacs should not be liable for any damages 1. The principle that one who is not a direct party to a particular contract normally does not have rights under that contract is known as 2. LSM Select theve privity of contract with Logan -Baldwin, while Isaacs Seine have pruty of contract with Logan Baldwm. 3. An exception to the doctrine of pelvity of contract arises when a contract is intended to benefit a thing 4. This case primarily deals with Pelect 5. Select is the promisor in this case 6. Sale is the promise 7. Select is the third party 8. A third party that is considered an intended beneficiary to a contract Select sue the promisor for breach of contract GO & + 3 4 ( 9 5 6 ) 0 7 8 E R Y U o LP se Problem Analysis 17.1: Third Party Beneficiaries 9. Athird party that is considered an incidental beneficiary to a contract we sue the promisor for breath of contract 10. in determining whether a beneficiary is an intended or incidental beneficiary, the presence of one or more of the following factors strongly indicates that the third party is an intended beneficiary to the contract whether performance is rendered Select 3 to the third party, if the third party has a right to saler 1), and if the third party is Suleet 11. Was Isaacs' performance directly to Logan Baldwin? Sect) 12. Did Logan-Baldwin have the right to control the details of Isaacs' performance? Sufact 13. Did Logan Baldwin expressly appear as a beneficiary in the contract? Select 14. Although a factor to be considered an intended beneficiary under the contract, the name "Logan-Baldwin" sauc 1 expressly appear in the terms of the contract 15. As a result of performance being rendered directly to Logan-Baldwin, and Logan-Baldwin's right to control the details of performance, Logan Baldwin will likely be considered an Select beneficiary 16. As an intended beneficiary, Logan Baldwin Select sue to enforce the contract, 12. Is it likely that the court would have ruled in favor of Logan-Baldwin? Select
