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