Reference no: EM134495

Question

Reference- Portraits. Belinda a well-known portrait painter agreed to paint Harry's portrait for $5,000. She likewise agreed to paint the portraits of Michelle's two Corgi dogs, Baby as well as Bree. Michelle decided to pay Belinda $10,000 for the portraits. Belinda charged Michelle more for the reason that dogs annoyed her. Belinda met the spoiled dogs as well as they really got on her nerves. Plus, she was overdue on finishing Harry's portrait. Belinda so proceeded to assign the right to obtain the money for the dog portraits as well as delegate the duty to paint the dog portraits to her assistant, Fred. He eagerly accepted as well as painted the portraits. She likewise assigned to Fred, as payment for amounts she payable him for various duties the right to collect payment from Harry. Neither the contract Belinda had with Harry nor the contract she had with Michelle expressly prohibited assignment or else delegation of contractual rights and duties. Belinda completed the portrait of Harry and called him to come and pick it up. In the meantime, a disgruntled secretary who not liked Belinda told both Michelle as well as Harry about the assignments to Fred. Michelle was furious as well as refused to pick up the portrait or pay anyone. Harry likewise declined to pay for his portrait. What would be the most probable result if Belinda sues Michelle for the $10,000 payment?

A. Belinda will win merely if Fred did a good job on the portraits.

B. Belinda will win regardless of what kind of job Fred did on the portraits so long as he was a qualified portrait painter.

C. Belinda will win for the reason that Fred was employed as her assistant.

D. Belinda will win for the reason that the contract did not contain an express provision prohibiting assignment or delegation of contractual rights as well as duties.

E. Michelle will win for the reason that the portrait was personal in nature and could not be assigned.