Reread the facts of Kaplan. In this case, the appellate court did not find that Coldwell Banker was an ostensible agent, only that there were sufficient facts to withstand a summary judgment (a declaration by the court that there were no facts to support a jury's finding that an ostensible agency existed.) The case was remanded for trial on the issue of whether an ostensible agency did in fact exist. Summarize the argument of Kaplan that an ostensible agency existed. How would Coldwell Banker argue to support its contention that no ostensible agency existed?