Varney had a severe gambling problem. Every night, he stayed awake to the early hours of the morning picking games and spreads and betting online or calling his bookie. Finally. Varney's wife, Bonnie, had enough of Varney's gambling. Bonnie entered into a written contract with Hyacinth, a gambling addiction therapist, who agreed to treat Varney twice a week for six months. The contract is signed in writing (by the contract parties, Bonnie and Hyacinth; and, of course, also by the patient. Varney). Varney then begins his counseling. However, after two months, Bonnie sees no improvement in Varney's behavior. After all, her debit cards just got declined at the store, and when she confronted Varney, he simply stated, "I lost \$1,000 on the Miami Marlins last night." Bonnie decides she is going to breach the contract, that is, to stop paying Hyacinth. What would a court most likely find, if Hyacinth sues Bonnie to enforce the contract and make Bonnie pay for the breach? UCC Article 2 governs: Bonnic will not have to pay a remedy or lost profits to Hyacinth, because the treatment did not work. Hyacinth had no enforceable rights with Bonnie because Hyacinth had furnished no consideration to Bonnie (the therapy sessions were simply between Hyacinth and Varney). UCC Article 2 governs; Bonnie will pay a remedy of lost profits to Hyacinth, because the sessions were not completed, and the original contract did not specify the length of Varney's recovery. This type of case would be heard in a court of equity. and both parties must tender specific performance. Common law governs: a judge would find in favor of Hyacinth. making Bonnie liable to pay under the terms of the contract