Although by all appearances Herb and Edna, an elderly couple, were destitute, they had, in fact, substantial cash in the bank. Their new neighbors, the Smiths, feeling sorry for them on Thanksgiving, bought a month's supply of food and gave it to Herb and Edna. Later, Edna confided in the Smiths that she and Herb had money and told them that, because they had been so kind, she was leaving them money in her will. All of Herb's and Edna's bank accounts were held in joint tenancy. When Edna died, at the Smiths' request Herb gave the Smiths the following signed instrument: "In consideration of my wife's promise to the Smiths, and their agreement not to sue her estate, I agree to pay them the sum of $ 5,000$." When Herb died of a heart attack several days later, the Smiths asked the administrator of his estate to pay them the $ 5,000$. The administrator refused on the ground that there was no consideration for the agreement. On which of the following theories would it be most likely that the Smiths would recover?
A. Herb's written instrument was a binding unilateral contract.
B. Herb's acceptance of the food was fraudulent.
C. Herb is bound by promissory estoppel.
D. Herb and the Smiths entered into a valid compromise.
Choose A, B, C or D as your solution.
D