In the Lucy v$.$ Zehmer case referenced in the text, involving whether there was assent to a contract or whether allegations of joking prevented the formation of the contract, what did the court determine?

Multiple Choice

The court ruled that the contract would be enforced because of what the parties verbally said, regardless of whether an objective person would have thought joking was involved.

The court ruled that the contract would not be enforced because one of the parties was joking, and a reasonable person should have known that.

The court ruled that the contract would not be enforced because the parties had been drinking and although they were not intoxicated, there was still no mutual assent.

The court ruled that the agreement would be enforced because under the applicable standard, the words and acts, judged by a reasonable standard, manifested an intention to be bound.