Malik, an attorney, undertook to defend Ayala, a bookkeeper, in a criminal case in which Ayala was charged with embezzling money from her employer. Malik handled the case so incompetently that he clearly committed malpractice. As a result, Ayala was convicted and sentenced to a year's imprisonment. Ayala's husband claims that Malik's incompetence has caused him financial loss because Ayala can no longer contribute to the family income. He has sued Malik for malpractice based on his failure to perform properly under his contract with Ayala.

Respond to the following:

1. Discuss whether Ayala's husband is an intended beneficiary of the contract between Malik and Ayala, and, with your determination on this issue in mind, whether Ayala's husband has an independent right to sue Malik.

1. Discuss whether your answer to (A) would be different if this contract had not involved the provision of legal services, but rather, the employment of an expert witness (by Ayala directly) for the trial, who failed to appear at the trial with no excuse. Assume that the expert's non-appearance is the reason Ayala, an innocent person, was convicted of the crime.