The purpose of this assignment is to deepen your understanding of how agency law applies by working through hypothetical situations you could possibly encounter in your personal or professional lives. These hypotheticals are loosely based on actual cases that have gone before a court for resolution.

Jessica Rabbit is a high-profile, wealthy actress living in Manhattan. Rabbit is well-known for her impressive collections of tiaras and diamond necklaces which were originally owned by royalty.

Vicki Dougan, Rabbit's friend, tells Archie Andrews that she (Dougan) is Rabbit's agent for the purchase of a matching emerald and diamond tiara and necklace set which Andrews recently acquired from a royal family. As proof, Dougan shows Andrews a newspaper clipping from that days edition of the New York Times mentioning Rabbit's interest in this unique emerald and diamond tiara and necklace set.

Andrews, knowing of Dougan's friendship with Rabbit, contracts with Dougan to sell the emerald and diamond tiara and necklace set, valued at $2,500,000.00, to Rabbit. Dougan takes the emerald and diamond tiara and necklace set and disappears with it.

On the payment due date, Andrews attempts to collect from Rabbit. However, Rabbit refuses to pay. Andrews asserts that Rabbit is liable for the contract based on her agency relationship with Dougan. Rabbit does not deny that Dougan was her friend, but she claims that Dougan was never her agent.

Discuss fully whether Rabbit (not Andrews) is liable under the contract based on an agency relationship in existence at the time the contract for the emerald and diamond tiara and necklace set was made (include the scope of any authority Dougan had to enter the contract on Rabbit's behalf). Remember to IRAC your answer.