Sam recently started a home-based business selling custom baseball hats. He decided that he could make a lot more money selling his hats online. He hires his next-door neighbor, a savvy web designer, to create the website. Joan has him sign an agreement that includes an exemption clause that limits her liability in cases of negligence. In the course of designing the website, Joan becomes annoyed at Sam because his dog keeps digging up her rose bushes. Rather than confront Sam directly, Joan deliberately puts the wrong pricing information on Sam's website to get him back. If Sam suffers damages as a result and wants to sue Joan, what would the likely result be?

options:

	The exemption clause would be severed as being an illegal restraint of trade.
	The exemption clause would protect Joan because of the principle of "freedom to contract."
	Joan's actions were outside the scope of the contract, so Sam would have no claim in law.
	Joan's acts were deliberate, not negligent, so she would not be protected by the exemption clause.