Paul sued Donna for breach of contract. Paul's position was that Joan, whom he understood to be Donna's agent, said: "On behalf of Donna, I accept your offer." Donna asserted that Joan had no actual or apparent authority to accept the offer on Donna's behalf. Paul's testimony concerning Joan's statement is 
admissible, provided the court first finds by a preponderance of the evidence that Joan had actual or apparent authority to act for Donna.  admissible, upon or subject to introduction of evidence sufficient to support a finding by the jury that Joan had actual or apparent authority to act for Donna.  inadmissible, if Joan does not testify and her absence is not excused.  inadmissible, because it is hearsay not within any exception.
Question: Paul sued Donna for breach of contract. Paul's position was that Joan, whom he understood to be Donna's agent, said: "On behalf of Donna, I accept your offer." Donna asserted that Joan had no actual or apparent authority to accept the offer on Donna's behalf. Paul's testimony concerning Joan's statement is 
A. admissible, provided the court first finds by a preponderance of the evidence that Joan had actual or apparent authority to act for Donna. 
B. admissible, upon or subject to introduction of evidence sufficient to support a finding by the jury that Joan had actual or apparent authority to act for Donna. 
C. inadmissible, if Joan does not testify and her absence is not excused. 
D. inadmissible, because it is hearsay not within any exception.
Answer: