Acar owner lent her automobile to her girlfriend for the specific purpose of picking up a pizza that the owner and the girlfriend had ordered for dinner. the girlfriend drove to the shopping mall where the pizzeria was located and parked the owner's car there. instead of going directly to the pizzeria, the girlfriend went into a bookstore, browsed, and eventually purchased a book. the girlfriend then went to the pizzeria and picked up the pizza, which had been ready for 15 minutes. just as the girlfriend left the pizzeria to return to the car, another car struck the owner's parked car, causing extensive damage to the car. the owner did not carry collision insurance, and the car required $800 worth of body work. if the owner sues the girlfriend on a negligence theory for damage to the car, who will prevail? a the owner, because the girlfriend exceeded her authority when she went to the bookstore. b the owner, because but for the girlfriend's delay in getting the pizza, the owner's car would not have been damaged. c the girlfriend, because she did not create a foreseeable risk of damage to the owner's car. d the girlfriend, because the family car doctrine imputes any of the girlfriend's negligence to the owner.