A burglar stole Collecta's impressionist painting valued at $400,000. Collecta, who had insured the painting for $300,000 with Artistic Insurance Co., promised to pay $25,000 to Snoop, a full-time investigator for Artistic, if he effected the return of the painting to her in good condition. By company rules, Artistic permits its investigators to accept and retain rewards from policyholders for the recovery of insured property. Snoop, by long and skillful detective work, recovered the picture and returned it undamaged to Collecta. If Collecta refuses to pay Snoop anything, and he sues her for $25,000, what is the probable result under the prevailing modern rule? 
Collecta wins, because Snoop owed Artistic a preexisting duty to recover the picture if possible.  Collecta wins, because Artistic, Snoop's employer, had a preexisting duty to return the recovered painting to Collecta.  Snoop wins, because Collecta will benefit more from return of the $400,000 benefit more from return of the $400,000 painting than from receiving the $300,000 policy proceeds.  Snoop wins, because the preexisting duty rule does not apply if the promisee's (Snoop's) duty was owed to a third person. 