granting summary judgment to Border States on Stern Oil’s third-party beneficiary breach of contract claim. 2. Whether the circuit court erred in granting summary judgment to Border States on Stern Oil’s unjust enrichment claim. 3. Whether the circuit court erred in granting summary judgment to Border States and Liberty Mutual on Stern Oil’s bond claim. Decision Third-Party Beneficiary Breach of Contract Claim [¶ 11.] “A contract made expressly for the benefit of a third person may be enforced by him at any time before the parties thereto rescind it.” SDCL 53-2-6. In order for a third party to enforce a contract, the contract itself must be enforceable. Cf. Jennings v. Rapid City Reg’l Hosp., Inc., 2011 S.D. 50, ¶ 35, 802 N.W.2d 918, 929 (Konenkamp, J., dissenting) (citation omitted) (<HOLDING>). One essential element of an enforceable
holding defenses concerning the contract as a whole must be referred to ah arbitrator while defenses to the arbitration provision itself are considered by the court holding that an arising out of exclusion applies to claims flowing from or growing out of the excluded activity recognizing the existence of antagonistic defenses does not require severance unless defenses are actually irreconcilable recognizing that a thirdparty beneficiarys rights are subject to any defenses and claims of the promisor against the promisee arising out of the contract holding as unambiguous under iowa law the insurance policys exclusion of coverage to any obligation of the insured to indemnify another because of damages arising out of  a bodily injury to any employee of the insured arising out of and in the course of his employment by the insured