Greg owns a marketing firm. He hires Addison as an account representative. Her job is to research opportunities for obtaining new clients, to meet with potential clients, and to sell the firm's services to those clients. Addison's employment contract with the firm includes the following clause: "Employee shall not perform any work, consultation, or other services for any other marketing firm within the county where the Firm's headquarters is located, for one (1) year following termination of employment with the Firm." Addison leaves the firm on August 1, 2011. On October 2, 2011, Greg finds out that Addison has a contract to help a rival firm identify new clients. Greg sues Addison for breach of the employment contract. What will be the most likely result? a. The judge will decide that the employment contract is substantively unconscionable because employment contracts should never restrict future employment options. b. The judge will decide the employment contract is procedurally unconscionable because it is most likely true that Greg, as the employer, had the upper hand in negotiating the contract. c. The judge will decide that the employment contract is enforceable because the 1-year bar is not excessive in duration and the county restriction is reasonable. d. The judge will decide that the employment contract is enforceable because it contains a valid exculpatory clause.