Doe v. Roe School

By Judge Edward L. Hogshire

This letter addresses the issue of whether an infant third-party beneficiary to a contract is entitled to maintain a cause of action for fraud. The question was raised in Oral argument on May 10,2005, regarding Defendants’ demurrers to Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for Judgment, and addressed in the patties’ Supplemental Memoranda. For the reasons articulated below, this Court finds that Plaintiff Child Doe may in theory recover on the fraud claim, and the relevant demurrers therefore remain overruled.

Procedural History

John, Jane, and Child Doe (“Plaintiffs”) filed the…