A housecleaning agency was given a key to a customer's house so that the agency could have its employees clean while the homeowner was away. After a maid sent by the agency had finished and left the homeowner's house, she went back because she had forgotten her cigarettes. She neglected to lock the door when she left the second time because she was already late for the next job. When the homeowner returned after a few days away, she discovered that her house had been ransacked and several items of jewelry stolen. The front door was open, and there were no signs of forced entry. If the homeowner brings an action against the agency that employed the maid, what is the likely result

C. She will prevail, because the maid's failure to lock the door created the risk that someone might enter and take the homeowner's valuables.

Explanation:

Based on the argument presented above, the homeowner will likely prevail against the agency because, the maid whibis an employee of the cleaning agency got the home exposed by failing to get the doors locked which might have allowed unwarranted entry into the building. The fact that there was no forced entry through any of the entry channels and the disappearance of valuables gives the homeowner a stronger case to make in this scenario in her case against the agency.

explanation: i am going to tell you a lie dont know i just wanted to answer lol

agriculture and oil. natural resources, industry.