A bridge on a prominent public roadway in the city of Springfield, Ohio, was deteriorating and in need of repair. The city posted notices seeking proposals for an artistic bridge design and reconstruction. Bridges by Madison LLC, owned and managed by Madison Mason and his wife, May Mason, decided to submit a bid for a decorative concrete project that incorporated artistic metalwork. They contacted Pablo Hand, a local sculptor who specialized in large-scale metal designs, to help them design the bridge. The city selected their bridge design and awarded them the contract for a commission of $184,000. Bridges by Madison and Hand then entered into an agreement to work together on the bridge project. Bridges by Madison agreed to install and pay for concrete and structural work, and Hand agreed to install the metalwork at his expense. They agreed that overall profits would be split, with 25 percent to Hand and 75 percent going to Bridges by Madison. Hand designed numerous metal pig sculptures that were incorporated into colorful decorative concrete forms designed by May Mason, while Madison Mason performed the structural engineering. The group worked together successfully until the completion of the project. Suppose Hand had entered into an agreement to rent space in a warehouse that was close to the bridge so that he could work on his sculptures near the location at which they would eventually be installed. He entered into the contract without the knowledge or consent of Bridges by Madison. In this situation, would a court be likely to hold that Bridges by Madison was bound by the contract that Hand entered? Help please here is the multiple choices

This is especially as far as this joint project is concerned. Since the purpose of the warehouse was to further and fulfill the project, the agreement entered into by hand for a warehouse affects Bridges by Madison.

In a joint venture, every aspect of the project's lifetime is shared: shared profits, shared losses, shared rewards, shared risks, shared obligations and responsibilities, shared rights and privileges until the end of the project, which also ends the joint venture, unless there is a binding agreement to the contrary. In such a case, Hand would not have been a joint-venturer but a sub-contractor.