A painter entered into a valid contract with a mayor to paint his portrait for $5,000. The contract provided that, rather than paying the painter, the mayor was to pay the $5,000 to the painter's son. The contract also prohibited the assignment of any rights or duties arising under the contract without the permission of the other party. Subsequently, the son, upon learning of the contract from his mother, decided to donate this money to a charity and transferred his rights under the contract to the charity without securing the permission of the mayor. The painter painted the portrait, but the mayor did not pay anyone. The charity filed suit against the mayor for breach of contract. The charity has taken no action nor incurred any expenses related to the contract. Will the charity prevail in its action against the mayor