Race entered into a written contract to sell a parcel of land to Lark for $150,000. At the time the agreement was executed, Race had consumed a large amount of alcoholic beverages that significantly impaired Race's ability to understand the nature and terms of the contract. Lark knew Race was very intoxicated and that the land had been appraised at $280,000. Race wishes to avoid the contract. The contract is: a. Voidable at Race's option. b. Void. c. Legally binding on both parties in the absence of fraud or undue influence. d. Voidable at Race's option only if the intoxication was voluntary.

Voidable at Race's option (A)

Explanation:

A voidable contract is a formal agreement between two parties that may be rendered unenforceable for a number of legal reasons. Some of these reasons could include :

-Failure by one or both parties to disclose a material fact

-A mistake, misrepresentation or fraud

-Undue influence or duress

-One party's legal incapacity to enter a contract

-One or more terms that are unconscionable

-A breach of contract

Ordinarily, a voidable contract is  considered to be legal and enforceable but can be rejected by one party if the contract is discovered to have defects.

In this case, Race was already intoxicated which was also known to the other party- Lark . Hence, this make the contract voidable at the option of Race.

explanation: doctrine of respondeat superior is a legal doctrine that is commonly used in tort. this principle makes an employer or principal legally responsible for the wrongful acts done by an employee or agent, if such acts occur within the scope of the employment or agency.