The Wattses contracted to sell real estate to MW Development in a contract that specified July 31 as the date for the closing. MW paid the Wattses a down payment and contracted to pay them 8 percent interest on the balance if it failed to close on time. Simpson was not a party to the real estate contract between the Wattses and MW, but he had loaned MW the money for the down payment. As security for this loan, MW executed a promissory note and assignment pursuant to which MW assigned all of its interest in the real estate it was buying from the Wattses. When Simpson saw this note, he realized that it did not become due until August 4 and, in addition, provided for a 10-day grace period before he could enforce his rights against MW. This left Simpson vulnerable to losing the deposit money. As a result, Simpson entered an agreement with the Wattses in which the Wattses agreed to a 14-day period during which Simpson would have the exclusive right to purchase the property on the same terms of MW, including credit for the down payment, should MW default. MW failed to buy the property, and the Wattses sued MW, Simpson, and others. In their claim against Simpson, the Wattses argued that the assignment contract between MW and Simpson obligated Simpson to perform the promises set forth in the real estate contract between the Wattses and MW. Given these facts, did Simpson assume the duties MW owed to the Wattses by becoming MW’s assignee such that he was obligated to buy the Wattses property upon MW’s default?