If the painter refuses to paint Magdalena’s house, would Magdalena succeed in a breach of contract action against the painter? Explain.
Magdalene can succeed in taking action on breach of contract against the painter. At hand is whether contracts can be assigned in the absence on the contrary to any provisions. Assumedly, contracts can be assigned unless the contract has other provisions, or the delegation or assignment can create a material alteration of the promisor’s duties. After signing the contract, the assignee can sue the promisor or the assignor when a breach occurs. In this case, the contract does not delineate that the contracts are impermissible, nor are they void. Therefore, John (the homeowner), who has promised to pay $6,000 in exchange for the paint painting his house, can delegate his duties and rights as provided by the contract to Magdalene (his neighbor) as long as the material change does not exist in the painters’ assignments. Besides, there is no change in the material in the painter’s duties since the exteriors of the houses are identical, have similar wear, and no difference in difficulty or magnitude that exist between the workload of painting the two houses. Thus, since there is no change in the material in the duties, and that the contract has no contrary provision, Magdalene can therefore succeed in an action of breach of contract against the painter.
- Assuming that Magdalena would succeed in the breach of contract action against the painter, would the retiree Steve succeed in a breach of contract action? Explain.
Considering the contract’s situation, the retiree cannot succeed in breach action of the contract against the painter. The issue at hand is whether the retiree is a beneficiary of an incidental or intended third party. There might be causes of action for third parties for breach of contract, but this is actionable when they are intended beneficiaries, and they have vested rights under the contract. Intended beneficiaries in contracts are those specifically who the contract’s benefits are made, and the contract generally names these beneficiaries. In this contract, the benefits were never meant for the retiree. It was to benefit the homeowner and later for the neighbor. Therefore, the retiree is only a beneficiary by accident and does not have any action against the painter.
- If the painter paints Magdalena’s house and then Magdalena does not pay the $6,000 contract price, would the painter succeed in a contract claim against Magdalena? Against John? Explain.
The painter can succeed against both Magdalene and John (the neighbor and homeowner, respectively). What is at stake is whether there was novation. When an assignor assigns a contract, he will remain liable on the contract until novation occurs, or when there is an agreement between the promisor and the assignor to replace the assignor with the assignee exclusively excruciatingly generating a new contract. Although, the assignee can become liable on the contract when he has accepted the assignment. However, there is no novation in this contract, as the painter has objected to substituting Magdalene for the homeowner in the contract. Though, since Magdalene has presumed the assignment, she is thus considered liable. Since there is novation, both John and Magdalene are therefore liable to the painter.