Murray v. ILG Technologies, LLC
United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia
378 F. Supp. 3d 1227 (2019)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
ILG Technologies, LLC (ILG) (defendant) entered a contract with the Georgia Office of Bar Admissions (OBA) in which ILG was required to provide a comprehensive software system that would record, organize, and display the bar-exam results of test-taking bar applicants. Section 1.1 of the contract was a provision requiring ILG to provide OBA with a “turn-key system of enterprise software for digitizing and electronically administering the entire bar admission process.” Other provisions required ILG to provide an electronic communication portal and technical support for the applicants. Ninety bar applicants (the applicants) (plaintiffs) took the bar exam in July 2015 and February 2016 and were informed that they had not passed their respective exams and failed to gain admission to the Georgia bar. In September 2016, the OBA informed the applicants that they had previously been incorrectly assigned failing scores and thus the applicants had actually passed their exams. The errors were seemingly caused by a glitch in ILG’s software system. As a class, the applicants sued ILG, asserting numerous claims, including breach of contract. ILG moved for summary judgment on the contract claim, arguing that the applicants could not legally recover for breach of contract because they were not third-party beneficiaries. It was undisputed that the applicants were not parties to the ILG-OBA contract.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Baker, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.