Need to elaborate on this discussion post:

Marvin Mower (MM) has the right to receive payment as the work was completed to Ursula Unhappys (UU) satisfaction at the time of service, and a document or promissory note was given by UU stating that the work was completed and MM was owed $50. For that reason, UU is responsible for paying MM as he is the holder of a document stating his work that was completed and the amount owed by UU. UU may refuse the right to payment, but she would need to prove she was not satisfied with the work done by MM. Given the document provided, Tommy's third party (TT) can seek the amount owed from UU. UU has the responsibility to pay TT unless she can prove she was dissatisfied with MMs work, and then that responsibility would fall to MM to reimburse TT. If UU were to prove she was not satisfied with MMs work and the contract was voided, TT would have the right to seek reimbursement from MM for the $40. TT may also have the right to seek damages from MM if he can prove MM provided false representation of the document he provided.