Refer to syllabus for further details.Read the ETHICS section of your text on page 255. This section describes a case in which a paralegal who had been orally promised a bonus of $1,065,000 was deprived of the bonus in a dispute because no written agreement existed as to the bonus as would have been required by the Statute of Frauds. That an agreement was had was beyond dispute, because there existed a (secret) recording detailing the promise of the bonus between the paralegal and his/her employer. As your text explains, the Statute of Frauds requires certain types of contracts (such as contracts to buy or sale land) to be both made in writing and executed with the physical signatures of all of the parties involved. This requirement was clearly not met. Further, the undisclosed recording of the agreement constitutes a crime. Was a fair result handed down in this matter? What, if anything, would you do to modify the Courts decision?