David Kidds dog bit Mikaila Sherrod. On June 14, 2010, the Kidds offered to settle for

$32,000. On July 12 the Sherrods sued the Kidds. On July 20 the Kidds bumped their

offer up to $34,000. The suit was subject to mandatory arbitration, which proceeded on

April 28, 2011. On May 5 the arbitrator awarded the Sherrods $25,000. On May 9 the

Sherrods wrote to the Kidds and purported to accept their last offer of $34,000, made

the year before. The Sherrods attorney moved to enforce that purported $34,000

settlement agreement. The court concluded that the offer was properly accepted

because it had not been withdrawn and entered judgment against the Kidds for $34,000.

The Kidds appealed. What result should obtain on appeal, and why?