Potential expert witnesses made an oral agreement with aplaintiff’s attorney to testify on behalf of the plaintiff for$60,000. However, after receiving the money, the witnesses backedout of the agreement and said they would not testify in court orpay back the money. The witnesses claimed that the plaintiff couldnot sue them because their oral contract was with the attorney andnot the plaintiff. Yet, the plaintiff claimed she could sue becauseshe was a third-party beneficiary to the contract. The court made alandmark decision regarding expert witnesses and third-partybeneficiary case law. What do you believe the surprising decisionwas in this case? What rationale
PayPal Gateway not configured
PayPal Gateway not configured