Stated more simply, a contract is only binding on those who are parties to it. Waterfield Mortg. v. Buckeye State Mut. Ins. Co., 1994 WL 527594, at *2 (Ohio Ct. App. 1994) (citing Delly v. Lehtonen, 21 Ohio App. 3d 90, *90 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984)). Here, the insurance contracts were between American Family and the various LLCs that were the legal owners of the different properties (Doc. No. 45, Ex. A). Sobh does not dispute that the LLCs were, in fact, the legal owners of the properties (Doc. No. 57, p. 10), and there were no other binding contracts between Sobh in his individual capacity and American Family. Should this Court nonetheless "look through" the LLCs and find that Sobh, as the sole member of the LLCs, had a contractual relationship with American Family allowing him to pursue this lawsuit?
A party cannot sue for performance or breach of a contract to which he is not a party or privy." Waterfield Mtge. v. Buckeye State Mut. Ins. Co. , 2d Dist. Miami No. 93-CA-53, 1994 WL 527594, *2 (Sept. 30, 1994), citing Delly v. Lehtonen , 21 Ohio App.3d 90, 90, 486 N.E.2d 251 (11th Dist.1984). {¶ 26} In this case, it is undisputed that appellant was not a party to the contract held between Omni and the appellees.
” Waterfield Mtge. v. Buckeye State Mut. Ins. Co., 2d Dist. Miami No. 93–CA–53, 1994 WL 527594, *2 (Sept. 30, 1994), citing Delly v. Lehtonen, 21 Ohio App.3d 90, 90, 486 N.E.2d 251 (11th Dist.1984). Intended third-party beneficiaries “have the rights of parties in privity of contract and thus may bring suit for breach of contract or to enforce performance.”
" Waterfield Mtge. v. Buckeye State Mut. Ins. Co., 2d Dist. Miami No. 93-CA-53, 1994 Ohio App. LEXIS 4343, *6 (Sept. 30, 1994), citing Delly v. Lehtonen, 21 Ohio App.3d 90, 90 (11th Dist.1984). Intended third-party beneficiaries "have the rights of parties in privity of contract and thus may bring suit for breach of contract or to enforce performance."
"{¶ 21}Bischoff v. B D Woodcrafters, Inc., Montgomery App. No. 11811, 1990 Ohio App. LEXIS 2016, citing Delly v. Lehtonen (1984), 21 Ohio App.3d 90. {¶ 22} Where third parties are involved, the Ohio Supreme Court has explained that only intended third-party beneficiaries to a contract have enforceable rights under a contract.