Grigerik v. Sharpe

Edward Lang hired engineer Gary Sharpe (defendant) to draft a site plan for land Lang had contracted to sell to Joseph Grigerik (plaintiff), allegedly telling Sharpe the town sanitarian required the plan to show proper drainage and septic implementation before approving the lot for building, and that a ready buyer awaited that approval; after the town sanitarian approved Sharpe's plan and Grigerik completed his purchase, a new sanitarian later denied Grigerik's building permit because the property, bordering a reservoir, couldn't support a septic system. Grigerik sued Sharpe for breach of contract as an alleged third-party beneficiary of the Lang-Sharpe contract; the trial court instructed the jury that Grigerik could recover as an intended, contemplated, or merely foreseeable beneficiary, the jury found for Grigerik, and the appellate court reversed, holding foreseeability alone was insufficient and that only the promisee's intent mattered.