Part 3- Contracts, Chapter 17: Rights of Third Parties, Doc 5

Here’s a summary of each question and its legal implications regarding contract law concepts, third-party beneficiaries, assignment of claims, and enforceability: Key Issues and Legal Analyses: 1. Jessica’s College Tuition Claim Against Her Father: o Issue: Jessica’s parents’ divorce settlement included a provision for her father to cover her post-secondary educational expenses. When her father did not fully pay these costs, Jessica sought to enforce the provision. o Analysis: Courts may allow adult children to enforce divorce judgments on educational expenses if the judgment explicitly grants this post-minority support. The enforceability depends on state law and whether Jessica was an intended beneficiary of the divorce agreement. 2. Francis’s Legal Malpractice Claim as a Third-Party Beneficiary: o Issue: Francis alleged malpractice against his brother’s attorney, asserting that his brother’s will revisions harmed him as the intended heir. o Analysis: For Francis to succeed, he must prove that his brother hired the attorney specifically to benefit him, a requirement under some state laws. In cases where a will aims to provide for a family member, courts may consider such beneficiaries as intended third-party beneficiaries with a right to sue. 3. JMB’s Warranty Claim on Twindows under the Deceptive Trade Practices Act: o Issue: After purchasing a building with warranty issues, JMB sued PPG for breach of warranty and a claim under Texas’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA). o Analysis: The DTPA aims to protect consumers, and many states do not permit the assignment of consumer protection claims due to their personal nature. JMB’s claim may depend on whether the court interprets DTPA rights as transferable alongside the building’s warranties. 4. Assignment of Leases and Clauses Limiting Assignment: o Issue: Many leases include clauses regarding assignability. The application of contract assignment laws hinges on these clauses, which may allow, limit, or prohibit assignment without consent. o Analysis: Lease assignments often adhere to contractual terms. If the lessor or lessee assigns the lease, the receiving party “steps into the shoes” of the assignor, assuming both rights and obligations unless a clause or state law dictates otherwise. Other Cases with Third-Party Beneficiary Implications: 5. Schauer and Mandarin Gems’ Engagement Ring Valuation: o Issue: Schauer sued as a third-party beneficiary of her ex-fiancé’s contract with a jeweler after the ring’s value was appraised lower than represented. o Analysis: To prevail, Schauer must prove she was an intended beneficiary, not merely incidental, by showing the jeweler intended the valuation to benefit her directly, not just her ex-fiancé. 6. White’s Release Agreement with Amex and Claims Against Other Parties: o Issue: White signed a release with Amex Insurance after an accident, which her defendants (Penske and Taylor) claimed should also protect them. o Analysis: Courts often use the “specific-identity rule” for releases, requiring explicit identification of released third parties. If the release did not specify Penske and Taylor, White may argue they were not intended beneficiaries and thus can still be liable. 7. Kethan’s Noncompete Clause and Employment Assignment: o Issue: Kethan’s noncompete clause with his employer, MedEcon, became a point of contention after MedEcon’s assets were acquired by MHA. o Analysis: Generally, unless specified, employment contracts involving personal services cannot be assigned due to their unique nature. However, MHA may argue the noncompete transfers with business assets unless the contract states otherwise. 8. Perry’s Indemnity Claim in a Business Asset Transfer: o Issue: Perry claimed indemnity after a lease obligation was not fulfilled by subsequent assignees in a chain of business transfers. o Analysis: Without novation (agreement to release the original obligor), Perry can argue that Northern Retail retained liability for indemnity even after assigning the business. Courts often hold that initial parties remain liable unless explicitly released. 9. Locke’s Claim as a Third-Party Beneficiary for Security at a Baseball Game: o Issue: Locke sued the school board for breach of duty to provide security under a state athletic association’s rules. o Analysis: For Locke to succeed, he must prove he was an intended third-party beneficiary of the association’s contract with the school board. Courts typically require explicit evidence that the contract intended to benefit specific third parties, which may be difficult to establish in public duty cases. These cases illustrate how contract law’s application varies based on specific language, intended beneficiaries, and local statutes, emphasizing the importance of clear terms in assignment and third-party beneficiary provisions.