Fleck v. National Property Management, Inc.

I concur in the result reached by the majority opinion but wish to state a different reason for doing so. It is my opinion that the conclusion on foreseeability of loss cannot be reached without first making a determination as to whether or not the plaintiffs have a legal right to proceed against the bond under a third-person beneficiary theory. It is my view that they cannot.

It has been a long-standing rule that notwithstanding the theory of third-party beneficiaries, a third person who is not named in the bond cannot recover.1 The reason for this restriction is that the bond is not usually…