2. Suppose that the plaintiff’s historical residence was typically open to the public for tours on weekends. Philip, a history buff, plans a trip to tour the home, but upon his arrival he finds it closed because the shoddy roofing work made the premises unsafe for the public. Does Philip have a cause of action against any of the defendants? Why?
Logan-Baldwin and other owners (collectively Logan-Baldwin) contracted with L.S.M. General Contractors (LSM) to renovate a historic residence. LSM subcontracted to Henry Isaacs Home Remodeling (Isaacs) to perform roofing work as part of the renovations. Isaacs then contracted with Brewster to install a new roof on the residence. Soon after the roof was completed it showed signs of leaking and it became clear that the roof was not installed correctly. LSM and Isaacs attempted to fix the problems, but were unsuccessful and subsequently abandoned the project. Logan-Baldwin hired other contractors to fix the problem and sued LSM, Isaacs, and Brewster for breach of contract. Isaacs defended that he did not directly contract with Logan-Baldwin and therefore cannot be sued for breach of contract.