The Institute of Progressive Studies, a well-known San Francisco research foundation, promises Teofilo, a college professor, that it will pay him a grant of $55,000 in order that Teofilo pursue his studies of the lives of "third-world revolutionaries." Teofilo is not required to produce any specific work product in exchange for this grant. He makes it clear to the Institute that he intends to obtain leave without pay from the university where he teaches and to move 1000 miles to San Francisco to complete the work. Accordingly, Teofilo secures the leave and makes the move. However, soon thereafter he is informed by the Institute that regrettably the grant will have to be revoked due to the Institute's unexpected loss of some government funding in the latest government budget "cut-backs." Teofilo then sues the Institute to recover his various losses. What is the best answer regarding the resolution of this lawsuit?

A. Teofilo prevails due to the promissory estoppel exception to the consideration requirement of contract law.

B. Teofilo prevails since the Civil Rights Act protects against national origin discrimination.

C. The Institute prevails since there was never an explicit written contract with Teofilo.

D. The Institute prevails due to the Impossibility of Performance doctrine of contract law.