Jim is an antique book dealer. He acquires inventory by using different buyers around the world to purchase antique books on his behalf. Jim pays each buyer a commission on any books thatn they purchase for him if the purchase is authorized. Jim trains each buyer to identify valuable books and uses a phone app to communicate with buyers about the value of potential purchases. This is common in the industry and is used to ensure potential sellers that Jim will honor the contracts entered by his buyers. The buyers are given business cards and other credentials that identify them as buyers for Jim's business and they use those credentials to introduce themselves to potential sellers. The buyers use Jim's contract forms to enter into contracts with sellers. Will, one of Jim's buyers, recently visited a book seller in Arizona. When Will spotted a rare, mint condition copy of the book To Kill a Mockingbird, he immediately viewed the app to confirm that it was an authorized purchase. Jim's app rated the book as a "Good Buy" but only at a maximum price of $2000. Will then remember that he and Jim had discussed this book just yesterday and that Jim had limited the purchase price to $1000 during that phone conversation. Will showed the app rating of "Good Buy" with the $2000 limit to the seller but did not tell the Seller about his phone conversation with Jim. The seller agreed to sell the book. Jim refuses to pay the seller and has since canceled his agreement with Will. Is Jim liable to the seller? Why or why not?

Please read and brief (in appropriate format) the case of Industrial Loan Thrift Guaranty Corporation of Iowa v. Reese & Company, P.C., 422 N.W.2d 178 (1988).

Considering Colorado precedent (assigned cases only), how would the Colorado Supreme Court decide the case of Industrial Loan case were it to happen in Colorado today?