Harold takes his girlfriend Greta out to dinner to an expensive restaurant. Greta checks her coat at the door of the restaurant. In the pocket of the coat is a diamond necklace worth $50,000.00. When Greta's coat is returned to her, the diamond necklace is gone. Greta sues the restaurant alleging that they had failed to exercise the proper degree of care as the bailee of the necklace. Who wins?

a.The restaurant. Because Greta was not charged for checking her coat, this is a bailment solely for the benefit of the bailor and the restaurant owes Greta no duty of care.

b.The restaurant. No bailment was created here. The restaurant did not take control of the necklace knowingly and therefore is not responsible for it.

c.Greta. This is a simple bailment and the restaurant owes Greta at least a minimal degree of care in handling her belongings.

Greta. Since the necklace was apparently taken by an employee of the restaurant, the restaurant negligently entrusted 'Greta's property to that employee.