Edgar and Peggy Stacy owned a 600-acre farm in Arkansas. The Williams family agreed to buy the farm for exist880,000. The parties need a contract form on which the real estate agreed typed, "Buyers to pledge approximately 900 acres of land in Tallahatchie in together with hands herein described for loan to pay purchase price." The Williams family then sought to obtain loans against the properties listed on the contract. They were unable to do so, because the Tallahatchie was subject to a long-term and overall the lands were worth less than they had previously believed. The Williams family notified the real estate agent and Edgar Stacy of these facts in writing and asked to rescind the contract. Several months later, the Stacys sold the farm to another party for exist630,000. They there filed a against the William family for breach of contract, seeking exist250,000, the difference between the exist880,000 offered by the Williams family and the amount paid by the ultimate buyer. The Williams family argued that their ability to obtain financing was a condition to their obligation to perform the contract. How would a court most likely rule in this case? a. The court most likely held that the Williams family's ability to obtain a loan was a condition precedent that had been partially performed. b. The court most likely held that the Williams family's ability to obtain a loan was a condition precedent, because it could be inferred from the phase added to the contract that the Williams family had to complete the purchase. c. The court most likely held that the Williams family's ability to obtain a loan was not a condition precedent but a condition d. The court most likely held that the Williams family's ability to obtain a loan was not a condition precedent, because the contract did not say that it was