Caretta Truc. v. Cheoy Lee Shipyards

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• requiring a plaintiff show that the parties contracted for his benefit in order to bring a breach of contract as a third party
• providing the elements that must be pleaded to state a cause of action for breach of third-party beneficiary contract and granting the plaintiff an opportunity to amend its complaint to explicitly allege the primary and direct intent element
• an intended beneficiary can belong to a class of persons which the parties to contract intended to benefit
• “It is insufficient to show that only one party unilaterally intended to benefit the third party”
• “[The exception to the rule that only a party to a contract may sue another party to the contract for . breach] is where the entity that is not a party to the contract is an intended third party beneficiary ... ”
• “A party is an intended beneficiary only if the parties to the contract clearly express, or the contract itself expresses, an intent to primarily and directly benefit the third party or a class of persons to which that party claims to belong.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).