A worker's boss knew that the worker loved to eat at a restaurant near their workplace.The worker frequently did not have enough cash to pay for meals and ran up bills.Wanting to make sure that the worker was properly nourished so that the worker could effectively do his job, the worker's boss told the restaurant to let the worker eat on credit and, if the worker could not pay the bills, the boss would pay the restaurant for the meals.The restaurant agreed.After the restaurant extended credit to the worker, the worker ran up a sizeable tab and said he could not pay.When the restaurant asked the worker's boss to pay, the boss refused.

If the restaurant sues the worker's boss for the amounts owed by the worker, is the restaurant likely to prevail?

Group of answer choices

No, because the boss's promise was not supported by consideration.

No, because the boss did not receive a benefit.

Yes, because it would be inequitable to decline to enforce the boss's promise.

Yes, because there was a bargained-for exchange.