Thompson’s house was destroyed by fire and claims were filed with the insurance company. The insurance company (insurer) hired Cannon to investigate the fire as it was suspicious about the cause. Subsequently, the insurer denied the claims based on Cannon’s report. Thompson sued the insurer and Cannon. Thompson claimed to be a third party beneficiary of the Cannon-insurer contract. Is Thompson correct? If not, what type of beneficiary is he and why?

David paid $975,000 for two beachfront lots in coastal south carolina, with the intention of building residential homes on each. two years later, the south carolina legislature passed the beachfront management act, barring any further development of the coast, including david's lots. when david files a complaint to seek compensation for his property, south carolina refuses, pointing to a passage in david's own complaint that states "the beachfront management act [was] properly and validly designed to south carolina's " is south carolina required to compensate david under the takings clause?