A Stitch in Haste

If fact patterns like this don't make you want to go to law school, then nothing will:

A woman who won a radio contest that promised the winner "100 grand" sued after the station gave her a candy bar — a Nestle's 100 Grand — instead of $100,000.
...
Night host DJ Slick sponsored the station's contest to "win 100 grand," Gill said in the lawsuit. Gill won by listening to the radio show for several hours and being the 10th caller at a specified time.

She went to the radio station the next morning to pick up her prize, but was asked to return later. When she got home, she found that the station manager had left a message explaining she had won a 100 Grand candy bar, not money.
...
Later, he offered her $5,000, Gill said. "I said I wanted $95,000 more," she said. "Nobody would watch and listen for two hours for a candy bar."

DJ Slick did not return an e-mail from the Herald-Leader, but he said on his Web site that he had left his job. WLTO and Cumulus declined to comment, identify DJ Slick by his given name or say whether he was fired.

Experts said the radio station could face action by the Federal Communications Commission, which licenses radio stations.
...
A prank in Florida led to a similar lawsuit that was settled in 2002. A former waitress claimed Hooters promised to award her a new Toyota car — but instead gave her a toy Yoda.

I have some thoughts, but open thread:

--Is she entitled to the $100,000?

--If so, who should have to pay: the DJ, the radio station, the parent company, or all of them?

--Is this a breach of contract claim or a fraud claim (or can it be both)? (This answer could be important, since a fraud claim can lead to punitive damages; breach of contract claims generally cannot.)

--Should a reasonable person have expected this to be a prank? Does the fact that she made promises to her children matter at all?

--Would it have mattered if the DJ had come clean right away that night rather than misleading the mother until the next morning?

--Would you have accepted the $5,000 settlement, held out for a larger settlement or simply rolled the dice in court for "$100,000 or zero"? Why?

--Is this the sort of problem that the FCC, as the licensing authority, should get involved in?

Comment away — non-lawyer opinions welcome!

Others blogging about this include Goldman's Observations, Conglomerate, This Blog Is Full Of Crap and Day on Torts.

UPDATE: Here's a previous version of a similar incident. Link seems to have died -- too bad.

Anyway, thanks to everyone who chimed in via the comments. I didn't see any unintelligent thoughts -- you should all go to law school! It's rewarding to know that smart people are reading me! :-)