Eva and Maria entered into a written contract pursuant to which Eva was to render decorating services for Maria for a total price of $75,000. After the services had been performed, a good faith dispute arose between Eva and Maria over whether all of the services had been properly performed. Eva claimed that the full amount was due, but Maria argued that only $50,000 worth of services had been performed. After several weeks of argument, Maria sent a check for $60,000 to Eva on which Maria had written "payment in full for decorating services." (a) Eva endorsed the check, without making any further notations on it, deposited it and sued Maria for the remaining $15,000 she claims is due. Judgment for whom? Explain.

(b) Instead of the facts in (a) assume that Eva wrote "under protest" on the check when she endorsed it and, after depositing it, sues Maria for $15,000. What result? Explain.

(c) Instead of the facts in (a) and (b), assume that Eva and Maria had a telephone conversation in which Eva agreed to take $60,000 in full satisfaction of Maria's obligation under the contract. Maria then sent the check, with a letter referencing the telephone conversation. Eva wrote "under protest" on the check, endorsed and deposited it, and then sued Maria for $15,000. What result? Explain.