Darin bought his fiancée Sarah a 3-carat diamond ring for $43,121 from Mandarin Gems. Later, Mandarin supplied the newlyweds with a written appraisal valuing the engagement ring at $45,500. Years later, the couple divorced and Sarah kept the ring. When she had the ring reappraised, another gemologist assessed its value at only $20,000. Sarah sued Mandarin for breach of contract, but the jeweller defended by saying that it had never made a contract with her. Does Sarah have contract rights against Mandarin?

Yes

Explanation:

Based on this information, it can be said that this is part of the court case Schauer v. Mandarin Gems of Calfornia. Which in term ended as the court held that Sarah was an intended done beneficiary since Darin made it very clear to Mandarin that its purpose was as an engagement ring for Sarah. Therefore even though Sarah was not a party to the contract that took place between Darin and Mandarin when purchasing the ring, she still has a right to enforce that contract and all the information that took place during it.

answer; ///the above statement is (false) .