On December 23, the First National Bank had its sales agent, Wyman, mail a written offer to Zeller to sell a parcel of real property for $240,000. On January 10, Zeller had his purchasing agent mail a written offer to buy the property for $230,000. The same counteroffer was made in a telephone conversation on that day to Wyman, but Wyman told Zeller's agent that the offer to sell the land was njo longer in effect. When Zeller's agent reported this news to Zeller, he promptly told his agent to wire an acceptance of the original offer at $240,000. Zeller's agent did as ordered and the telegram of acceptance arrived before the letter containing Zeller's counteroffer. The bank refused to sell, reminding Zeller that the offer to sell had been revoked and that its agent Wyman had so informed Zeller's agent in the telephone conversation on January 10. Nevertheless, Zeller sued theb ank for specific performance and for damages. Who should win? (Zeller v. First National Bank, 797 ILL. App. 3d 170, 398 N.E.2d 148)