Ron and Julia entered into an agreement whereby Ron agreed to paint the outside of Julia's house for a fee of $3,000. R0n painted the residential part of the house but did npt paint the garage because he did not believe that the contract required him to paint the garage. When Julia inspected Ron's work, she told him that she would not pay the full $3,000 because Ron had failed to paint the garage. Julia asserted that she believed that the language of the contract was clearly intended to include the garage. After half an hour of negotiation, Ron says, "Enough arguing already - pay me $2,500 and I will accept it as full payment of my services." Julia replies, "OK. I agree." Julia then sends Ron a check for $2,500 with a note indicating that it is full payment for his recent painting services. Ron signs the back of the check and deposits it in his bank account. A week later, Ron sues Julia for what he claims is the remaining $500 owed to him. (a)Judgment for whom? Explain fully. (b)Would your answer to (a) be different if Ron had written "without prejudice" on the back of the check'before he deposited it? Explain fully