1. Francisco is seeking someone to paint his fence for a party on Sunday. He finds Paul and says, "Paul, I really need my fence painted. Is this something you can do for $200?" Paul looks over the fence, determines it would take many hours and lots of supplies to paint the fence and says, "The job looks pretty big, I can't do the job for less than $400." Francisco says, "I really like your work but I don't know if I can afford $400, would you consider doing it for $300?" "Paul says, "I'll do it for $300" and Francisco says, "Deal" and hires Paul to paint his fence this Saturday at 8:00 AM for $300. Paul provides a written document to Francisco. Paul signs it but Francisco does not. The document states that the paint will cost $100 and the labor will cost $200 to paint the fence which will occur on Saturday at 8:00 AM. On Friday morning Paul calls Francisco and leaves a message for him informing him that he does not believe he will be able to make it on Saturday since his current project is taking longer than expected. Francisco tries to call Paul back but cannot get a hold of him. Friday night, Francisco calls the only other painter he knows, Dan. Dan is available to paint Francisco's fence and Dan says he will paint the fence for $500. Being in such rush Francisco immediately accepts Dan's price of $500 to paint the fence. Dissect this fact pattern above and define all legal principles involved. Determine and describe whether or not a contract was reached between any of the parties. Also, if you determine there was a valid contract what principle should govern any remedy and available to Francisco? What equitable and monetary remedies would be available? If you determine no contract existed, what remedy if any would Francisco have against Paul? What is the likely result of any suit and argument against either party? What additional duty, if any, would Francisco owe to Paul after Paul fails to show up? (100