Use the IRAC method to answer the questions

VII. Chapter Problems 1. Cutting Packing Company contracted to purchase Blackwood's apricot crop for a specific price. The purchase contract was assigned to the Packers' Exchange of California. Blackwood refused to accept Packers' in place of Cutting. Blackwood delivered the apricots to Cutting. Cutting delivered the apricots to Packers' and they were refused. Cutting paid Blackwood the contract price and sold the apricots at the prevailing market price, which was less than the contract price. Cutting sued Packers' for the price difference. Packers' claims that since Blackwood did not accept the assignment to Packers', there is no enforceable assignment and it owes nothing. Was there a valid assignment to Packers'? Is Blackwood's consent necessary? Did Cutting have to accept and pay for Blackwood's apricots or was this the sole responsibility of Packers'? Will Cutting recover from Packers'? 2. Thompson's house was destroyed by fire and claims were filed with the insurance company. The insurance company (insurer) hired Cannon to investigate the fire as it was suspicious about the cause. Subsequently, the insurer denied the claims based on Cannon's report. Thompson sued the insurer and Cannon. Thompson claimed to be a third party beneficiary of the Cannon-insurer contract. Is Thompson correct and why? 3. Turner was covered by a group life insurance policy at the time of his death. His wife had predeceased him and they had no children. However, he had an illegitimate child born shortly after his death. The group policy provides that benefits are payable: "To the wife or husband, if living, of the employee; if not living, to the children of the employee who survive the employer, equally; if none survives, to either the father or mother of the employee...." The issue is whether "children" in the policy includes ox excludes illegitimate children. How do you decide and why