Kay, an art collector, promised Hammer, an art student, that if Hammer could obtain certain rare artifacts within 2 weeks, Kay would pay for Hammer’s postgraduate education. At considerable effort and expense, Hammer obtained the specified artifacts within the 2-week period. When Hammer requested payment, Kay refused. Kay claimed that there was no consideration for the promise. Hammer would prevail against Kay based on:.
A. Unilateral contract.
B. Unjust enrichment.
C. Public policy.
D. Quasi contract.

Hammer would prevail against Kay based on:.

A. Unilateral contract.

Explanation:

A unilateral contract is a contract created by an offer that can only be accepted by performance. To form the contract, the party making the offer (called the “offeror”) makes a promise in exchange for the act of performance by the other party.

in relation to the case in the contract, Hammer had carried out the duties expected of him thus making the contract valid under a unilateral contract.  

since in a unilateral contract, the offer can only be accepted when the other party completely performs the requested action.

Hence  Hammer would prevail against Kay based on Unilateral contract.

answer; i believe that the correct answer is (d); the business benefits because owners can share responsibilities;