Treetop at Stratton Condo. Ass'n v. Treetop Dev. Co. (2011)

Citation: Treetop at Stratton Condo. Ass'n v. Treetop Dev. Co. (2011)
Parent Document: Treetop at Stratton Condo. Ass'n v. Treetop Dev. Co. (2011)
Jurisdiction: Vermont (state)
Effective Date: 2011-02-04
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4489923/treetop-at-stratton-condo-assn-... ↗

Full Text

981 chars

Lastly, Plaintiff briefly alludes in its opposition briefs that it should be recognized as a
third party beneficiary to any contracts between Stratton and Defendants which would afford it
some of the rights Stratton would possess against Defendants. “The determination of whether a
party may be classified as a third-party beneficiary is based on the original contracting parties’
intention.” McMurphy v. State, 171 Vt. 9 (2000). Whether or not a party is a third-party
beneficiary is a matter of law and is based on the intention of the original contracting parties.
Morrisville Lumber Co., Inc. v. Okcuoglu, 148 Vt. 180, 184-85 (1987). A party alleging third-
party beneficiary status must present evidence indicating that the parties in privity entered into
their agreement in contemplation of conferring a benefit on the third party. Id. Such evidence
has not been presented by the Association, and thus the Court concludes that no third-party
beneficiary claim is sustainable.

Other Sections in This Document (48)

Full Text