Rachel is a poor college student, struggling to work part-time and go to

college full-time. Rachel's uncle Roger (feeling sorry for Rachel) sends her a

letter in which he promises to pay Rachel $300 per month for the next year, so

that Rachel can finish up her Associates Degree. Rachel then quits her job to

focus on her studies. Roger makes two monthly payments, but then stops

making payments, with no explanation at all. Rachel writes Roger, asking for him

to explain, but she never hears back from him. If Rachel takes this to court to try

to get the remaining $3,000, what is the likely result?

a. Roger should win, as he did not ask Rachel to quit her job, and they did not

have a contract.

b. Roger should win, as family members cannot sue each other for breach of an

agreement like this.

c. Rachel should win, as a contract was formed when Roger promised to pay her

the $300 per month support for a year.

d. Rachel should win. Even though there was no legal contract here, there is

another legal theory that Rachel can use to win her case against Roger