10. Sally hired her friend Joe to be the general contractor in charge of doing substantial repairs to her house. Joe had previous experience in this field when he lived in Colorado but he does not have the required state- issued license to work in this field here in Texas. He had applied for this license but it had not yet been issued. Sally was aware of all of this and told him it didn't matter. They wrote a contract calling for Joe to receive $10,000 for his work. Suppose that Sally refuses to pay him for his work and he claims he is legally entitled to be paid because (1) Sally expressly consented to hire him knowing he did not have a license, and (2) when they contracted he had applied for the license even though he had not yet received it. Based on the Mayo case excerpt in chapter 14, which of Joe's arguments shoul (c) both, (d) neither one. d succeed: (a) (1), (b) (2)