Pedro is jogging in the park in his neighborhood and notices signs posted on trees.

Pedro is jogging in the park in his neighborhood and notices signs posted on trees. The next time he passes by one of the signs, he decides to take a breather and read what is being posted. The sign says lost dog and has a picture and name of the dog. The sign says, “I’ll pay $750 to anyone who returns my lost dog” and also provides the phone number and email address of the owner. Pedro takes a screen shot of the posted note.

When Pedro gets home, he shows the screen shot to his friend Briana and Briana then asks Pedro to text her that screen shot. Briana and Pedro agree that if either of them find the dog and return it to the owner, they would split the reward 50/50. It just so happens that Briana finds the dog and follows the instructions (exactly as specified on the reward sign) to return the dog and collect the reward.

When she delivers the dog back to the owner, the owner of the dog asks Briana how she knew of the reward. Briana mentioned her friend Pedro showed her the posted note. The owner said that since she did not directly know about the reward sign as this is now secondhand knowledge, they did not have a contract and refused to pay her the $750. Briana then sues the owner of the dog. In completing this discussion post, please address whether there was a contract between Briana and the owner of the dog and why? Be specific and detailed as to why. Just providing there was or was not a contract is not sufficient.