Gale v. Rector

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a non-party has “no right to enforce the particular contracts” unless the contract shows “an intent to benefit the third party”
• finding no third-party enforcement right even where “the parties were aware” that a contracted-for building was being built “for [the third party’s] use”
• dismissing tort claims as duplicative of contract claims because “the factual allegations set forth in each cause of action are identical, except that the negligence claim is framed in terms of [the] failure to comply with professional standards of care”
• negligence claim must be based on a duty distinct from defendant's contractual obligations
• “[A]n intent to benefit the third party must be shown, and absent such intent, the third party is merely an incidental beneficiary with no right to enforce the particular contracts.”
• “We have previously sanctioned a third party’s right to enforce a contract . . . when it is . . . clear from the language of the contract that there was an intent to permit enforcement by the third party.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).