While working in the yard, Cherie found a beat-up ring. Betty, an adult neighbor, came over to visit and told Cherie she liked it. Cherie said, "You can have this old ring if you would like." Betty replied, "I do really like it - Maybe it's a real diamond!" Cherie laughted and told her that there was a one in a million chance of that.

A few months later Betty rushed over to Cherie's house and told Cherie that the ring was actually a diamond worth over $2,000. Betty gave Cherie the ring to examine. Cherie put it in her pocket and told Betty that she would never have given it to her if she had realized its value and that Cherie herself really owned it and was entitled to it. Cherie also told Betty that Betty failed to legally accept the ring because neither of them knew its true value and because Cherie did not sign any document turning over title to the ring to Betty. Betty sues.

Which of the following is true regarding Cherie's statement that she was entitled to the ring because she would not have given it to Betty if she had known the true value?

1- Cherie is entitled to ownership of the ring, but only if she can prove in court that she truthfully did not realize its true value.

2- Cherie is entitled to ownership of the ring, because it was originally found in Cherie's yard.

3- Cherie is entitled to ownership of the ring, but only if she can prove that she did not realize its true value and that there was a difference of at least $1,000 between what she believed the value to be and its true value.

4- Being ignorant of the value of the ring does not entitle Cherie to ownership of it since she gave it to Betty.