Facts for next questions: Froth is a bar in Bloomington. Froth pays its bartenders $10 per hour to work during times set by the bar's manager. The bartenders serve drinks to customers from a set menu, they keep track of how much customers owe, they collect payment using cash registers and credit card machines, and they clean up after their shift. Consumers are generally aware of the fact that bartenders at most bars typically have authority to give free drinks to customers (e.g., as replacements for incorrect or poorly made drinks, or simply as a complimentary drink). At Froth, however, the manager has told its bartenders that they cannot give free drinks -- only the manager can (but customers do not know this). And everyone knows it is illegal to serve alcohol to people under the age of 21. Froth recently fired its bar manager. It doesn't necessarily want everyone to know that it fired its bar manager, but it is worried that the fired bar manager might try to cause trouble for Froth.

If one of Froth's bartenders damages a customer's car in Froth's parking lot when arriving at work before the bartender's shift begins, which is the most likely outcome?

A. Froth will not be liable because the bartender was not an employee B. Froth will be liable because the bartender was an employee and was on the job C. Froth will be liable because the bartender was acting with apparent authority D. Froth will not be liable because the bartender was not acting in the scope of employment E. Froth will be liable because the bartender was acting on behalf of a fully disclosed principal