Enforcing Third Party Beneficiary Breach of Contract Claims

Useful Rulings on Breach of Contract – Third Party Beneficiary

Recent Rulings on Breach of Contract – Third Party Beneficiary

T-12 THREE, LLC VS. TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

HRG HRG is the successor-in-interest to the Owner of the real property (i.e., the ground lessor), an express third-party beneficiary of the Contract.

  • Hearing

    Apr 25, 2026

FEDORA BLISS, LLC VS JOHN LABIB + ASSOCIATES, A BUSINESS ENTITY, FORM UNKNOWN

On March 29, 2019, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint (“FAC”) against Defendant for (1) breach of contract and (2) false promise. Plaintiff alleges it is the third-party beneficiary of a contract between KFA, LLP, an architect, and Defendant, an engineer, as part of a construction project. (FAC, ¶ 8.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

DEREK TSAI VS BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

American Arbitration Assn., supra, 64 F.3d at p. 776; see also MS Dealer, supra, 177 F.3d at p. 947 [agency and related principles; third party beneficiary].) Here, defendant relies only on equitable estoppel principles.” Boucher, at 268.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

CP MARGUERITE MV, LLC VS. O’NEILL

In Electronic, the Court found: “EEC’s third party beneficiary suit against SBC was not a consequence of LAUSD’s negligence; it was a consequence of SBC’s own breach of contract. The underlying action was independent of LAUSD’s negligence; EEC, therefore, cannot recover its attorney’s fees.” (Id. at 617). Here, Cross-Complainant pursued Orchard on claims for Breach of Contract (as a third party beneficiary) and Intentional Interference with Contract. (See Cross-Defendant’s Exhibit 5 [ROA No. 444]).

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

IVAN K STEVENSON VS WAI CHING SHILON ET AL

The elements for breach of contract are (1) formation of a contract between plaintiff and defendant; (2) plaintiff’s substantial performance or excuse for failure to perform; (3) all conditions for defendant’s performance had occurred; (4) defendant failed to perform; and (5) plaintiff was harmed by that failure. CACI 202.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

ONESIMO BENITEZ HERNANDEZ ET AL VS THE KROGER CO ET AL

Similarly, the Court finds that Doo-Rite has demonstrated that Alpha Beta’s claims for breach of contract and express warranty, which are both based on its status as a third-party beneficiary to the FP/Doo-Rite subcontract agreement (Doo-Rite’s Ex. 3, FACC, ¶¶ 12, 16), are without merit because Alpha Beta has failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether it was a third-party beneficiary to the FP/Doo-Rite subcontract agreement.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

GALAM VS OPITZ

No breach of contract pled Opitz does not plead any breach of contract by Corinthian. The SACC alleges Corinthian became aware of a stipulation between McBride and Opitz that provided for McBride and Opitz to receive equal shares of any proceeds from the sale of the properties. (SACC ¶123.) The SACC adds to the allegations made in the FACC that this “stipulation became part of the escrow instructions.” (SACC ¶123.) No other facts are included to support this statement.

  • Hearing

    Jul 06, 2020

CITY OF GLENDALE VS KENNEDY/JENKS CONSULTANTS INC ET AL

Second Cause of Action, Breach of Contract: OVERRULED Staheli argues that the demurrer to the breach of contract claim should be sustained because it is barred by the statute of limitations and there was no contract between Staheli and Glendale. Statute of Limitations Staheli argues that the claim is barred by the statute of limitations. The statute of limitations for a breach of contract claim is four years. (CCP § 337.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

CANDICE, AN INDIVIDUAL WARREN VS FOXPOINT MEDIA, LLC, A MISSOURI CORPORATION, ET AL.

Plaintiff contends that attaching a contract is not the exclusive means of pleading breach of contract, as a party may plead the legal effect of the contract rather than its precise language, as Plaintiff has done here. (Miles v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 394, 401.) The Court finds that Plaintiff has sufficiently alleged a cause of action for declaratory relief against Defendant Netflix.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MONICA LOPEZ VS CENERGY INTERNATIONAL SERVICES, LLC

ORDER DENYING SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION AND GRANTING, IN PART, AND DENYING, IN PART, MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION Introduction On August 7, 2018, Plaintiff Monica Lopez (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint against, inter alia, Cenergy International Services, LLC (“Defendant”), asserting the following causes of action: Cause of Action #1: Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy Cause of Action #2: Retaliation Cause of Action #3: Breach of Contract Cause of Action #5: Intentional Misrepresentation

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

PASSANTINO VS. NRT WEST

B, p. 13, ¶ 6.4 (c).) 1st Cause of Action – Breach of Contract NRT is liable for PPM’s breach of both the Listing Agreement and the Purchase Agreement. (See Gilbert v. Krauss (1930) 110 Cal.App. 79.) The Listing Agreement contemplates that a Cooperating Broker might be involved in the transaction. It expressly states that such a Cooperating Broker is a third-party beneficiary of that Agreement and may sue the Seller’s Agent. (Listing Agreement, ¶2.3.)

  • Hearing

    Jun 26, 2020

JENS NEUFINCK VS MARIA FERNANDEZ, ET AL.

First Cause of Action, Breach of Contract: OVERRULED The elements for a breach of contract cause of action are: (1) the contract; (2) plaintiff’s performance or excuse for nonperformance; (3) defendant’s breach; and (4) resulting damages. Reichert v. General Ins. Co. (1968) 68 Cal.2d 822, 830. Defendants argue that the demurrer should be granted as to this claim because they are not parties to the lease agreement. Instead, the lease agreement is between Plaintiff and Maria. (FAC, Ex. A.)

  • Hearing

    Jun 26, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

SLM PRIVATE CREDIT STUDENT LOAN TRUST 2004-A VS SCOTT J JUDY

“[A] third party — that is, an individual or entity that is not a party to a contract — may bring a breach of contract action against a party to a contract only if the third party establishes not only (1) that it is likely to benefit from the contract, but also (2) that a motivating purpose of the contracting parties is to provide a benefit to the third party, and further (3) that permitting the third party to bring its own breach of contract action against a contracting party is consistent with the objectives

  • Hearing

    Jun 24, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Promisory Note

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

LESLIE BENE VS FIDELITY INVESTMENTS INC., ET AL.

., Fidelity Brokerage Services LLC, Fidelity Distributors Corporation, National Financial Services LLC, Fidelity Management Trust Company, and Does 1 - 50 alleging: (1) breach of contract; (2) broker malpractice; (3) negligence; and (4) breach of fiduciary duty.

  • Hearing

    Jun 24, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

ANDREW SMITH, ET AL. VS SOLOMON KELLY, ET AL.

On September 3, 2019, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint (SAC) against Jack Rabbit, Jim Dunnigan, Sammy McMahon, and James Dunnigan, alleging: (1) fraud; (2) fraud in inducement; (3) intentional misrepresentation; (4) negligence; (5) breach of contract; (6) breach of warranty; (7) conversion; (8) fraudulent deceit; (9) breach of expressed indemnity; (10) negligence; (11) failure to obtain permit; (12) failure to obtain license; and (13) breach of contract-third party beneficiary.

  • Hearing

    Jun 23, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ANDREW SMITH, ET AL. VS SOLOMON KELLY, ET AL.

On September 3, 2019, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint (SAC) against Jack Rabbit, Jim Dunnigan, Sammy McMahon, and Pacific Coast Construction, James Dunnigan, alleging: (1) fraud; (2) fraud in inducement; (3) intentional misrepresentation; (4) negligence; (5) breach of contract; (6) breach of warranty; (7) conversion; (8) fraudulent deceit; (9) breach of expressed indemnity; (10) negligence; (11) failure to obtain permit; (12) failure to obtain license; and (13) breach of contract-third party beneficiary

  • Hearing

    Jun 23, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

SYD LEIBOVITCH VS ROBERT DBA ROBERT CARY DOOR AND WINDOW CARY, ET AL.

Eleventh Cause of Action: Breach of Contract/Third Party Beneficiary To state a cause of action for breach of contract, Plaintiff must be able to establish “(1) the existence of the contract, (2) plaintiff’s performance or excuse for nonperformance, (3) defendant’s breach, and (4) the resulting damages to the plaintiff.” (Oasis West Realty, LLC v. Goldman (2011) 51 Cal.4th 811, 821.)

  • Hearing

    Jun 22, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

THE GLOBE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION V. THE GLOBE AT 2ND AND SANTA CLARA L.P., ET AL.

Nevertheless, Plaintiff 7 as a third-party beneficiary can enforce implied warranties made to the developer defendants. 8 (See Gilbert Financial Corp. v.

  • Hearing

    Jun 19, 2020

THE NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, A WISCONSIN CORPORATION VS. MCKENNACO, INC.

Second Cause of Action for Breach of Contract- Third Party Beneficiary & Third Cause of Action for Breach of Contract- Third Party Beneficiary: “[U]nder California’s third party beneficiary doctrine, a third party — that is, an individual or entity that is not a party to a contract — may bring a breach of contract action against a party to a contract only if the third party establishes not only (1) that it is likely to benefit from the contract, but also (2) that a motivating purpose of the contracting parties

  • Hearing

    Jun 19, 2020

SHERI MURRAY V. GERALD HARTZELL

In reply, Defendants contend that while the opposition alleges that the minor children are beneficiaries of the lease, “Plaintiffs cite no law permitting third party beneficiaries to assert a claim for breach of contract. (See Sessions Payroll Management, Inc. v. Noble Construction Co. (2000) 84 Ca1.App.4th 671, 680 [‘The party claiming to be a third party beneficiary bears the burden of proving that the contracting parties actually promised the performance which the third party beneficiary seeks.’].)”

  • Hearing

    Jun 10, 2020

GREENBERG VS. CCRMC

Plaintiff filed this action alleging breach of contract, interference with contract, and fraud. Motion The County and Defendant Saadi move for summary judgment on the following grounds: (a) Plaintiff is not a third-party beneficiary of the contract between the County and Staff Care, (b) Plaintiff cannot sue the County for interference with contract; (c) the County and Dr. Saadi did not cause Staff Care to breach a contract with Plaintiff, and (d) Dr.

  • Hearing

    May 27, 2020

GREENBERG VS. CCRMC

Plaintiff brings this cause of action for breach of contract.

  • Hearing

    May 27, 2020

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT VS EAST BAY RESTAURANT SUPPLY, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION , ET AL.

., and/or FEW Co, Inc.) for (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of contract (third party beneficiary); (3) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (4) common count for money had and received; (5) breach of express warrant; (6) breach of implied warranty; and (7) declaratory relief. On June 4, 2019, East Bay Restaurant Supply, Inc. filed a cross-complaint against Food Warming Equipment Company, Inc.

  • Hearing

    Mar 17, 2020

FLIGHTLINE RESTAURANT LLC ET AL VS CITY OF SANTA BARBARA

There is no possibility of alleging new facts that would make FRL a third party beneficiary that can sue for breach of contract or the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Guarantors have not suggested a rationale for exoneration that they have not waived. Therefore, the court sustains the demurrer to the seventh, eighth, and tenth causes of action without leave to amend. 10.

  • Hearing

    Mar 13, 2020

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

SARA T KETABI VS BARRINGTON PACIFIC, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

Lease/Breach of Contract Allegations Defendants move to strike allegations of a lease between plaintiff and defendants. Plaintiff argues she entered into a rental contract with defendants and/or was a third party beneficiary of such agreement. This is contradicted by the rental agreement. When there are unexplained contradictions between exhibits and the allegations in a complaint, the allegations are disregarded as surplusage. Edgerly v. City of Oakland (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1191, 1198.

  • Hearing

    Mar 13, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 21     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.