Hickman v. SAFECO Insurance Co. of America

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that an intended beneficiary under a section 302 analysis has a contractual right to enforce a promise
• holding same when policy contained excess loss clause, coverage for personal property, provision that insurer would adjust personal property losses with borrower and would pay borrower, and provision allowing borrower to seek arbitration of appraisal of covered loss
• ascertaining contracting parties’ intent to benefit a third party by reading contract terms in light of all the surrounding circumstances to determine whether there is an “objective manifestation” of such intent
• third party may enforce a contract as an intended beneficiary if recognition of third-party beneficiary rights is “appropriate” and either the “duty owed” or “intent to benefit” test is met

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).