Sullivan v. Raza

How later courts describe this case

• concluding that, under the terms of the'policy, the United States was clearly an intended third-party beneficiary
• dental malpractice; doctrine of res ipsa loquitur of inferred negligence can be applied to expert’s testimony that particular result would not “ordinarily” happen
• “secondary meaning encompasses the situation where people in the public come to think of a word or name as standing for the business of a particular owner”
• "[t]he commercial substance of the transaction rather than its form, must be considered, and the courts should guard against sham transactions ..."