## Facts

- A Cobb County high school football team attended a three-day training camp at a YMCA camp under a rental contract between the school and the camp.
- The contract allocated duties between the contracting parties, stating the visiting group would provide “qualified personnel” to patrol the waterfront, while the camp disclaimed responsibility for lake activities.
- During camp, players used a zip line that dropped into the camp’s lake.
- A student, Daniel Sterling, entered the lake and later began struggling in the water; teammates and an assistant coach attempted rescue and brought him to shore.
- Daniel later died; his parents sued the head coach and school district for wrongful death on tort theories and for breach of contract as alleged third-party beneficiaries of the rental agreement.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to defendants on tort claims based on official and sovereign immunity but denied summary judgment on the contract claim, allowing the third-party-beneficiary theory to proceed.
- Defendants appealed the denial of summary judgment on the contract claim.

## Issues

1. Whether the student was an intended third-party beneficiary of the camp rental contract such that his parents could sue for breach of that contract.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Georgia reversed the trial court’s denial of summary judgment on the contract claim.
- The court held, as a matter of law, that the student was not an intended third-party beneficiary of the rental contract.
- The court directed entry of summary judgment for the defendants on the breach-of-contract claim.

## Legal Principles

- A nonparty may enforce a contract only if the contract clearly shows an intent to benefit that person directly; incidental beneficiaries lack standing to sue.
- Intent to create enforceable third-party rights must appear on the face of the contract; foreseeable or practical benefit from performance is insufficient.
- Contract provisions allocating responsibility and risk between contracting entities do not, without clear beneficiary language, confer enforceable rights on individuals affected by performance.

## Conclusion

The court held that the rental agreement’s waterfront-safety allocation did not clearly manifest an intent to grant students enforceable rights, making the decedent at most an incidental beneficiary; the breach-of-contract wrongful death claim therefore failed, and summary judgment was required for the coach and school district.


Donnalley v. Sterling, 618 S.E.2d 639 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005)