A bridge on a prominent public roadway in the city of Springfield, Ohio, was deteriorating and in need of repair. The city posted notices seeking proposals for an artistic bridge design and reconstruction. Bridges by Madison LLC, owned and managed by Madison Mason and his wife, May Mason, decided to submit a bid for a decorative concrete project that incorporated artistic metalwork. They contacted Pablo Hand, a local sculptor who specialized in large-scale metal designs, to help them design the bridge. The city selected their bridge design and awarded them the contract for a commission of $184,000. Bridges by Madison and Hand then entered into an agreement to work together on the bridge project. Bridges by Madison agreed to install and pay for concrete and structural work, and Hand agreed to install the metalwork at his expense. They agreed that overall profits would be split, with 25 percent to Hand and 75 percent going to Bridges by Madison. Hand designed numerous metal pig sculptures that were incorporated into colorful decorative concrete forms designed by May Mason, while Madison Mason performed the structural engineering. The group worked together successfully until the completion of the project. Suppose Hand had entered into an agreement to rent space in a warehouse that was close to the bridge so that he could work on his sculptures near the location at which they would eventually be installed. He entered into the contract without the knowledge or consent of Bridges by Madison. In this situation, would a court be likely to hold that Bridges by Madison was bound by the contract that Hand entered? Help please here is the multiple choices