In DiFolco v.MSNBC,a TV commentator e-mailed her supervisors indicating that she wished to have a meeting to discuss her exit from the shows and to give MSNBC ample time to replace her.However,the commentator also wrote that she wanted to be part of the MSNBC team "for a long time to come." MSNBC claimed anticipatory repudiation.The court
A) found DiFolco did not manifest a clear and unequivocal repudiation and ruled in her favor on the issue of anticipatory repudiation.
B) found DiFolco's e-mails were unambiguous in expressing her intent to leave and ruled in MSNBC's favor on the issue of anticipatory repudiation.
C) found DiFolco's e-mails were ambiguous but her past employment issues were sufficient to indicate refusal to perform.
D) dismissed DiFolco's claim and ruled that the e-mails constituted DiFolco's anticipatory repudiation.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

A) DiFolco's e-mails were ambiguous in terms of what DiFolco's future plans may have been and included DiFolco's statement that she did not resign and was merely speculating about future time frames.
J) DiFolco's e-mails were ambiguous in terms of what DiFolco's future plans may have been and included DiFolco's statement that she did not resign and was merely speculating about future time frames.
K) DiFolco's e-mails were ambiguous in terms of what DiFolco's future plans may have been and included DiFolco's statement that she did not resign and was merely speculating about future time frames.
L) DiFolco's e-mails were ambiguous in terms of what DiFolco's future plans may have been and included DiFolco's statement that she did not resign and was merely speculating about future time frames.

In DiFolco V