Difference in intended-incidental third party beneficiary/ Business Economics
A professor owned a home next door to a very dilapidated, neglected home. John Cataldo purchased the home next door and made a contract with Wizard Home Improvements for a complete renovation of the property. The professor was delighted because the improvement of the Cataldo home was upgrading the neighborhood and raising the value of the professor’s home.
After making the last required payment on the contract, John Cataldo became seriously ill and ultimately was taken to a nursing home for care.
When Wizard learned of Cataldo’s illness and confinement, Wizard ceased work on the Cataldo home. Because the outside renovation work had not been completed, the premises began to return to its former rundown condition. The professor ultimately sued Wizard as a third-party beneficiary of the contract between Cataldo and Wizard.
Do you think the professor will be successful in his lawsuit against Wizard? Explain in terms of third-party beneficiary law. What is the difference between an “intended” third party beneficiary and an “incidental” third party beneficiary? Who has enforceable rights under the contract?
I would also like you to comment on the case found on page 394 in the Case Summary in your Online Course Resource. Do you agree with the court’s holding? How would you feel if you were a hotel guest that was bitten by a spider?
