Lee Calan Imports, Inc., advertised a used 2012 Dodger Charger for sale on a free online auto sales directory. A sales agent at Lee Calan had inputted into the website's online form that the price of the Dodge Charger should be exist19, 995. Through a technological glitch on the part of the website, however, the price was listed as exist19,000, No other details about the car were given in the online listing/advertisement. After viewing the online ad, Christopher O'Brien visited the Lee Calan Imports dealership and examined the car. O'Brien stated that be wished to purchase it for the online advertised price of exist19,000. Initially, one of the sales agents agreed but then refused to sell the car for the price. O'Brien filed a insult against Lee Calan for breach of contract, claiming that the online advertisement constituted an offer that he had accepted. How would a court most likely rule on O'Brien's claim of a breach of contract? a. The court most likely found that there was a contract, because the advertisement constituted a valid offer. b. The court most likely found that there was a contract, because the advertisement contained an error on which O'Brien relied. c. The court most likely found that there was no contract, because the only detail in the offer was the erroneous price term, and it was therefore not an offer that could be accepted. d. The court most likely found that there was no contract, because an advertisement is never an offer